Total Posts:133|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Michelle Bachmann, the stupidest person ever

YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.
Tsar of DDO
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

I agree the latter trumps the former, and, yes, I would expand it much, much further than that and to its logical extremes.
Not serving someone because they are gay is quite pathetic, and I hope they'd go out of business because of it.
My work here is, finally, done.
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

There really aren't a whole lot of Republicans outside of the tea baggers that I just hate, but Michelle Bachmann is one of them. Sarah Palin is another. Todd Akin, Rick Santorum and Ted Cruz are on par with the aforementioned.

I agree the latter trumps the former, and, yes, I would expand it much, much further than that and to its logical extremes.
Not serving someone because they are gay is quite pathetic, and I hope they'd go out of business because of it.
Tsar of DDO
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 9:05:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?
Homestate pride, I suppose.
Not much news on the national scene from my state in politics in the last 15 years outside of those two......and the death of Wellstone, Al Franken (cuz he's famous), and Tim Pawlenty (cuz he ran in the primary).

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.
I believe in the "right to refuse service to anyone for any reason". If that reason is bigoted religious views, so be it. I am not sure where the harm is in you not eating at my diner. (and seriously, how is one supposed to KNOW you are gay. Frankly, the law as I understood it is too problematic as it is written)
The fact that it is cloaked in religion bothers me, but politics makes strange bedfellows.

There really aren't a whole lot of Republicans outside of the tea baggers that I just hate, but Michelle Bachmann is one of them. Sarah Palin is another. Todd Akin, Rick Santorum and Ted Cruz are on par with the aforementioned.

I don't like Bachmann, not necessarily due to her views (although some), but she is an idiot and says stupid things and cannot communicate.
Santorum and any other republican that talks about freedom of religion out one side their mouth, and Christian values as the basis for laws out the other, is a hypocrite to me.

I agree the latter trumps the former, and, yes, I would expand it much, much further than that and to its logical extremes.
Not serving someone because they are gay is quite pathetic, and I hope they'd go out of business because of it.
My work here is, finally, done.
LogicalLunatic
Posts: 1,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 7:54:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Why? Because she is a Republican and Republicans are evul!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A True Work of Art: http://www.debate.org...

Atheist Logic: http://www.debate.org...

Bulproof formally admits to being a troll (Post 16):
http://www.debate.org...
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

There really aren't a whole lot of Republicans outside of the tea baggers that I just hate, but Michelle Bachmann is one of them. Sarah Palin is another. Todd Akin, Rick Santorum and Ted Cruz are on par with the aforementioned.

I agree the latter trumps the former, and, yes, I would expand it much, much further than that and to its logical extremes.
Not serving someone because they are gay is quite pathetic, and I hope they'd go out of business because of it.
Nolite Timere
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.
Tsar of DDO
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 10:47:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Yeah, I don't think this applies to private institutions. Boy what a mess that would be. That would be in direct conflict with the first amendment. Can you imagine how far the concept of political correctness and victimhood would go?
Nolite Timere
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 10:55:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 10:47:32 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Yeah, I don't think this applies to private institutions.

You don't have to think it. What matters is that the Supreme Court, as well as numerous federal courts, state courts, state legislatures, etc. do.
Tsar of DDO
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 11:00:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 10:55:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:47:32 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Yeah, I don't think this applies to private institutions.

You don't have to think it. What matters is that the Supreme Court, as well as numerous federal courts, state courts, state legislatures, etc. do.

Well they would be wrong, both from a legal standard and moral standard. But hey, who cares. Liberals have picked up Machiavellianism for quite a while now.
Nolite Timere
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 11:07:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 11:00:19 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:55:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:47:32 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Yeah, I don't think this applies to private institutions.

You don't have to think it. What matters is that the Supreme Court, as well as numerous federal courts, state courts, state legislatures, etc. do.

Well they would be wrong, both from a legal standard and moral standard. But hey, who cares. Liberals have picked up Machiavellianism for quite a while now.

It is with great relief that I know we leave the interpretation of our laws to judges rather than teenagers...
Tsar of DDO
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 11:35:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 11:07:23 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 11:00:19 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:55:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:47:32 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Yeah, I don't think this applies to private institutions.

You don't have to think it. What matters is that the Supreme Court, as well as numerous federal courts, state courts, state legislatures, etc. do.

Well they would be wrong, both from a legal standard and moral standard. But hey, who cares. Liberals have picked up Machiavellianism for quite a while now.

It is with great relief that I know we leave the interpretation of our laws to judges rather than teenagers...

Are we resorting to fallacies now?
Nolite Timere
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2014 11:41:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 11:35:58 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 11:07:23 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 11:00:19 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:55:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:47:32 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Yeah, I don't think this applies to private institutions.

You don't have to think it. What matters is that the Supreme Court, as well as numerous federal courts, state courts, state legislatures, etc. do.

Well they would be wrong, both from a legal standard and moral standard. But hey, who cares. Liberals have picked up Machiavellianism for quite a while now.

It is with great relief that I know we leave the interpretation of our laws to judges rather than teenagers...

Are we resorting to fallacies now?

Well, since your mention of Machiavellianism, I think so... lol
Tsar of DDO
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 7:31:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.
Actually, it's the Civil Rights Act, and similar laws, that apply, not the 14th amendment.
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 7:35:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 7:31:42 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.
Actually, it's the Civil Rights Act, and similar laws, that apply, not the 14th amendment.

Keeping in mind that laws like these are what prevent me from smoking in my house, allowing smoking in bars, and allow a whole host of conflicting legal issues and lawsuits.
My work here is, finally, done.
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 11:37:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 7:31:42 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.
Actually, it's the Civil Rights Act, and similar laws, that apply, not the 14th amendment.

The civil rights act is an exercise of congressional authority given to it within the scope of section 5 of the 14th amendment.
Tsar of DDO
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 11:47:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The right to refuse someone service is, in fact, a direct consequence of the right to one's life. I really don't see how it could be interpreted in any other way.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 11:52:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Stopping woman from voting is a completely different issue than refusing to serve someone. It's the difference between stealing a car, and not selling one.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 12:03:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Tolerance literally means "to allow the existence of". It is therefore not inherently good to be tolerant - tolerance of what ? matters. From a legal standpoint, the right to be gay does not take precedence over the right to practice one's beliefs so long as one does not initiate force against another. Since denying someone service is not a forceful action - just as being gay isn't - we should be tolerant of that intolerance.

I think that's enough of an education for today.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 12:08:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 11:37:13 AM, YYW wrote:
At 9/1/2014 7:31:42 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.
Actually, it's the Civil Rights Act, and similar laws, that apply, not the 14th amendment.

The civil rights act is an exercise of congressional authority given to it within the scope of section 5 of the 14th amendment.

Except the only applicable excersice is in section 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Let's break it down:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
Deals with citizenship. Not applicable to private services.

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
State law, not private policy
A law does not need to be made nor enforced regarding I engage in commerce.

nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
states cannot do this, not citizens

nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
"of the laws", not private policies

So, show me where I cannot discriminate against X in my private business.

I'll grant you that anyone who receives government funding or contracts must comply, but golf courses sure don't need to? What is the difference between a golf club, the boy scouts, and a restaurant?
My work here is, finally, done.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 12:11:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/31/2014 11:07:23 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 11:00:19 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:55:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:47:32 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/31/2014 10:41:55 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/30/2014 9:50:58 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/30/2014 7:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

It's not a regular occurrence, that I see someone this stupid, make comments this stupid, in such a spectacularly stupid way.

I always feel I have to defend her, and Jesse Ventura....

Why?

I had to stop, as it was painfully awkward. However, I think the point she was trying to make was this:
Gays should be respected and not discriminated against (whether she actually believes this or not is debateable....but c'mon, look at her husband), but
sincerely held religious views should be upheld.

Religion is not license to harm other people... and the argument she made is stupid, and the totality of that damnably backwards law in Arizona showcase their stupidity by supporting it. They also give Christianity a bad name, but that's a common thing with Republicans these days. People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

Can we note here that there is no right to be served by a private institution

Except for that whole part about equality under the law in the 14th amendment, sure.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Yeah, I don't think this applies to private institutions.

You don't have to think it. What matters is that the Supreme Court, as well as numerous federal courts, state courts, state legislatures, etc. do.

Well they would be wrong, both from a legal standard and moral standard. But hey, who cares. Liberals have picked up Machiavellianism for quite a while now.

It is with great relief that I know we leave the interpretation of our laws to judges rather than teenagers...

I'm sorry, but they've thoroughly demonstrated that they cannot read for sh1t.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,249
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 1:10:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
Religion is not license to harm other people... People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

I wish Hamas sympathizers would believe that.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 1:11:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 12:14:31 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
For the record, Michelle Bachmann has nothing on Harry Reid:

https://www.youtube.com...

Thank you!
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 1:16:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 12:14:31 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
For the record, Michelle Bachmann has nothing on Harry Reid:

https://www.youtube.com...

Or how about this guy...

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

Priceless!
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 1:44:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 1:10:51 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
Religion is not license to harm other people... People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

I wish Hamas sympathizers would believe that.

Me too...
Tsar of DDO
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,249
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 2:00:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 1:44:41 PM, YYW wrote:
At 9/1/2014 1:10:51 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
Religion is not license to harm other people... People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

I wish Hamas sympathizers would believe that.

Me too...

It's so hypocritical for conservatives to condemn Muslim extremists for blindly following a genocidal religion for while they blindly follow their own religion to condemn anyone who isn't exactly on the extreme ends of the Kinsey scale.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 7:47:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 1:16:12 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 9/1/2014 12:14:31 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
For the record, Michelle Bachmann has nothing on Harry Reid:

https://www.youtube.com...

Or how about this guy...

http://youtu.be...

http://youtu.be...

Priceless!

Obama was almost definitely kidding in the first one.
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 7:50:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 2:00:21 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/1/2014 1:44:41 PM, YYW wrote:
At 9/1/2014 1:10:51 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 8/30/2014 10:08:17 PM, YYW wrote:
Religion is not license to harm other people... People's right to practice their religion ends where other's civil liberties begin.

I wish Hamas sympathizers would believe that.

Me too...

It's so hypocritical for conservatives to condemn Muslim extremists for blindly following a genocidal religion for while they blindly follow their own religion to condemn anyone who isn't exactly on the extreme ends of the Kinsey scale.

The irony is overwhelming, yeah...
Tsar of DDO