One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Conservatives Appear to Want it Both Ways
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
May 23, 2020 12:04:49   #
Wolfman888
 
Seth wrote:
It's amusing that while you feature that Orwell quote in both the meme at the top of your posts and underneath them, the politicians described in the quote are the very Democrats you obviously vote for.

Technically, that makes you an accomplice to both the attempted socialist overthrow of America and the heavy handed corruption practiced by those same leftist politicians.

Now if that's not a real head scratcher, I don't know what is...
It's amusing that while you feature that Orwell qu... (show quote)


Keep scratchin your head and pickin your nose, and adjustin yer pants, Seth,
that's what you're good at.

The quote is about corruption, not indicative of any particular party.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 12:24:59   #
Seth
 
Barracuda2020 wrote:
It certainly does, obviously, you don't understand the unprejudicial rights/amendments, and why they are being taken to court again. Now for further clarification we have the Equality Act, passed in May, 2019.


The Equality Act is a bill passed by the United States House of Representatives on May 17, 2019 that would amend the Civil Rights Act to "prohibit discrimination on the basis of the sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition of an individual, as well as because of sex-based stereotypes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act_(United_States)#Purpose_and_content
It certainly does, obviously, you don't understand... (show quote)


Nonetheless, the Supreme Court ruled in Phillips' favor with only two dissents. I have no doubt that if Masterpiece is further pursued by representatives of the LGBTQandWhateverElse® community and local vote chasing Democrats, SCOTUS will again rule in the bakery's favor.

The framers of the Constitution likely never imagined that America would one day sink to a level wherein any government, local or federal, would not only become grossly intrusive, but would do so on behalf of both atheism and sexual deviation.

No matter how many "legal" and other angles the LGBTQetc factions and their leftist Democrat sponsors attack from, I don't see the inevitable final appeals to SCOTUS ever going anyplace but in favor of Phillips.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 12:32:42   #
dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA
 
Barracuda2020 wrote:
It certainly does, obviously, you don't understand the unprejudicial rights/amendments, and why they are being taken to court again. Now for further clarification we have the Equality Act, passed in May, 2019.


The Equality Act is a bill passed by the United States House of Representatives on May 17, 2019 that would amend the Civil Rights Act to "prohibit discrimination on the basis of the sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition of an individual, as well as because of sex-based stereotypes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act_(United_States)#Purpose_and_content
It certainly does, obviously, you don't understand... (show quote)


How can the Equality Act be applied retroactively to include this case?

| Reply
May 23, 2020 12:39:54   #
dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA
 
Wolfman888 wrote:
Keep scratchin your head and pickin your nose, and adjustin yer pants, Seth,
that's what you're good at.

The quote is about corruption, not indicative of any particular party.


Instead of your snarky comments which never add anything to the debate, why don't you explain what you mean? Or is that above your pay grade? It's easy to disagree without providing a reason.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 12:50:54   #
Barracuda2020
 
Seth wrote:
Nonetheless, the Supreme Court ruled in Phillips' favor with only two dissents. I have no doubt that if Masterpiece is further pursued by representatives of the LGBTQandWhateverElse® community and local vote chasing Democrats, SCOTUS will again rule in the bakery's favor.

The framers of the Constitution likely never imagined that America would one day sink to a level wherein any government, local or federal, would not only become grossly intrusive, but would do so on behalf of both atheism and sexual deviation.

No matter how many "legal" and other angles the LGBTQetc factions and their leftist Democrat sponsors attack from, I don't see the inevitable final appeals to SCOTUS ever going anyplace but in favor of Phillips.
Nonetheless, the Supreme Court ruled in Phillips' ... (show quote)


What is indicative of which way they will turn is the mere fact of the latest amendment to our civil rights,the Equal Rights Act., this past even under the Trump senate in 2019, I'd say the baker is screwed unless he is judged by a completely corrupt court to vote against the constitution and in favor of his bias. Our protective rights, trumps religious ones. Do no harm comes first, otherwise religious fanatics would still be killing people under (their)God's name.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 12:56:59   #
Seth
 
Wolfman888 wrote:
Keep scratchin your head and pickin your nose, and adjustin yer pants, Seth,
that's what you're good at.

The quote is about corruption, not indicative of any particular party.


Wolfwomanman, all I get from you is typical leftist malarkey without a shred of evidence or an iota of anything but partisan garbage.

The last refuge of an ignorant, immature, brainwashed leftist is posting pure insults sans any substance.

Having said that, where corruption is concerned, it certainly oozes from the Democratic Party, with examples among the Pelosis, Bidens, Clintons, Obama's, Kerrys and others. Just like today's Democrats' propaganda daddy Josef Goebbels instructed, "always accuse your opposition of doing what you yourself do."

That's why all you preadolescent mentality lefties are constantly hurling unfounded accusations at President Trump while ignoring all the very real and blatant corruption that thrives in your own party.

Now run along, I think your mommy's calling you. Probably to change your diaper or something....

| Reply
May 23, 2020 13:03:01   #
Barracuda2020
 
dtucker300 wrote:
How can the Equality Act be applied retroactively to include this case?


For the same reason the amendment has taken place, it was and is morally wrong. These rights were put in place for all as protections. If one prejudice slides through the cracks then they all do. For example, if a couple is driving on a desert road and is needing gas, but let's say they look like flaming homosexuals, or are black, Muslim, Mexican, or whatever, and the gas attendant says they can't sell gas to them for religious reasons, they are allowed to put those peoples lives in danger, unfortunately, some have no conscience to their bias and would try and do just that. This is why lines cannot be crossed, there are no exceptions. We live under the belief, the ideology, that we are all equal.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 13:06:06   #
Wolfman888
 
dtucker300 wrote:
Instead of your snarky comments which never add anything to the debate, why don't you explain what you mean? Or is that above your pay grade? It's easy to disagree without providing a reason.


I happen to like snarky comments.

If you don't like it don't respond like a tool.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 13:13:07   #
Wolfman888
 
Seth wrote:
Wolfwomanman, all I get from you is typical leftist malarkey without a shred of evidence or an iota of anything but partisan garbage.

The last refuge of an ignorant, immature, brainwashed leftist is posting pure insults sans any substance.

Having said that, where corruption is concerned, it certainly oozes from the Democratic Party, with examples among the Pelosis, Bidens, Clintons, Obama's, Kerrys and others. Just like today's Democrats' propaganda daddy Josef Goebbels instructed, "always accuse your opposition of doing what you yourself do."

That's why all you preadolescent mentality lefties are constantly hurling unfounded accusations at President Trump while ignoring all the very real and blatant corruption that thrives in your own party.

Now run along, I think your mommy's calling you. Probably to change your diaper or something....
Wolf s woman /s man, all I get from you is typical... (show quote)


The Trump White House has had more corruption, dirty dealing, profit making, nepotism,

and other nefariousness in one month than any of those mentioned above have in their lives.

If all you know about history is to quote Goebbels, go back to your fascist militia bunker,

edit "Mein Kampf" and let the grown ups figure it out.

And you will need a diaper service home delivery

when your corrupt golden god goes down in November and whines all the way to prison.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 13:19:56   #
Seth
 
Barracuda2020 wrote:
What is indicative of which way they will turn is the mere fact of the latest amendment to our civil rights,the Equal Rights Act., this past even under the Trump senate in 2019, I'd say the baker is screwed unless he is judged by a completely corrupt court to vote against the constitution and in favor of his bias. Our protective rights, trumps religious ones. Do no harm comes first, otherwise religious fanatics would still be killing people under (their)God's name.


No, that last is a bit extreme.

Contrary to many arguments from the left, the west as a whole including the United States has evolved socially to the point that outside the inevitable lone psychotic or small cult ala the late Branch Davidians, violent religious extremism has disappeared and, equally, been made illegal.

In order to push its dogmas on us and attempt to render our moral and religious values obsolete, the left refuses to acknowledge that social evolution, just as they cite decades old problems that have long since been solved as ongoing reasons to acquiesce to environmentalists' and others' demands or employ revisionist history to shape the political instincts of today's young.

The problem with that is that the left is unreasonably and non-negotiably opposed to any semblance of a "live and let live" concept and will fight tooth and nail to see that every one of us is some day compressed firmly beneath the thumb of an authoritarian government, living both publicly and privately to their specifications.

I do not see that coming to fruition in what remains of my lifetime for the simple reason that it runs contrary to what we as Americans are accustomed to, in effect what flows in our veins, and when certain things are permitted to reach a "Hey, wait just a minute!" level, there will be a correction of sorts.

Although Democrats cannot come to grips with it, the election of Donald Trump in 2016 was a prime example of the above. Government had gotten so off track that things reached that "Hey, wait just a minute!" level, and we elected a non-politician to come in and fix things, which he has been doing despite an unprecedented amount of interference and attacks from the Democrats.

But I digress -- the reason I believe that the SCOTUS will continue to rule in Phillips' favor is that while Congress can pass any "act" it wants, The Court is there to rule on the letter and intent of the Constitution.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 13:20:02   #
nwtk2007
 
Seth wrote:
Typical Leftist twisting of events.

Jack Phillips did not and does not refuse to serve gays -- he merely refuses to bake cakes for gay weddings or for sex change events due to his religious beliefs. If they want to buy those products he bakes for all of his customers, they are as welcome in his bakery as anyone else.

The problem there is simply that gays and the Democrats who pander for their vote have no problem forcing their agendas on those of us whose religious convictions forbid what we perceive to be perversions of G-d's will.

Anyone who respects the Bill of Rights (you know, that inconvenient section of the Constitution that protects us from the totalitarian whims of the likes of today's Democrats), gay, straight or bisexual, would simply have taken their business to another bakery, but no... These people, both the gays who demand that we all accept their abnormal preferences for "making whoopie," whether we like it or not, as normal and the Democrats whose stock in trade seems to be unchecked intrusiveness in all our lives feel the need to try and destroy someone's livelihood because he won't cooperate with their agendas.

In the case of your meme, a suitable comparison would be the extremes of your lying accusations, for example when Mitt Romney, during his run for president, said that it shouldn't cost the taxpayer $800.00 to give one person $200.00 in food stamps -- while the Democrats knew damn well he was merely alluding to the inefficiency of an overstuffed beaurocracy, they yelled that he wanted to do away with food stamps.

The same with every other issue: if one didn't vote for Hillary or Obama, it had nothing to do their not believing either was the best candidate for the office, it was because they didn't want a woman or a black person to be president.

Anyone who's not completely stupid can see the dishonesty in these slanderous claims.

As for the face masks, they are mandated by local governments and failure to comply can lead to businesses being shut down or summonses being issued, no matter how local businesses wish to observe regulations pertaining to the Covid-19 pandemic.

What it all amounts to is Democrats lying to the people because they have no actual plan that would appeal to most voters or people to carry one out, know they're going to lose the House and see President Trump re-elected.
Typical Leftist twisting of events. br br Jack Ph... (show quote)



| Reply
May 23, 2020 13:22:14   #
dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA
 
Barracuda2020 wrote:
For the same reason the amendment has taken place, it was and is morally wrong. These rights were put in place for all as protections. If one prejudice slides through the cracks then they all do. For example, if a couple is driving on a desert road and is needing gas, but let's say they look like flaming homosexuals, or are black, Muslim, Mexican, or whatever, and the gas attendant says they can't sell gas to them for religious reasons, they are allowed to put those peoples lives in danger, unfortunately, some have no conscience to their bias and would try and do just that. This is why lines cannot be crossed, there are no exceptions. We live under the belief, the ideology, that we are all equal.
For the same reason the amendment has taken place,... (show quote)


I agree with your analysis 100%. However, in reference to the Phillips case, how can a law that retroactively makes something illegal be applied to something that was legal when it occurred? How will this apply to the bakers since the SCOTUS has already ruled?

| Reply
May 23, 2020 14:18:31   #
PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco
 
bestpal38 wrote:
If I am made to wear a mask, I will shop elsewhere. My choice!! My face!!


That choice I wholeheartedly support.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 14:42:50   #
PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco
 
dtucker300 wrote:
I agree with your analysis 100%. However, in reference to the Phillips case, how can a law that retroactively makes something illegal be applied to something that was legal when it occurred? How will this apply to the bakers since the SCOTUS has already ruled?


Regardless of new laws or SCOTUS' ruling one way or the other, Article I, section 9, clause 3 of theU.S. Constitution specifically forbids Ex Post Facto federal laws.

But at the state level Ex Post Facto is regularly used to decriminalize some actions (like possession of small amounts of marijuana) that occurred in the past when the actions were illegal.

An interesting use at the state level.

| Reply
May 23, 2020 15:12:26   #
Wolfman888
 
Seth wrote:
No, that last is a bit extreme.

Contrary to many arguments from the left, the west as a whole including the United States has evolved socially to the point that outside the inevitable lone psychotic or small cult ala the late Branch Davidians, violent religious extremism has disappeared and, equally, been made illegal.

In order to push its dogmas on us and attempt to render our moral and religious values obsolete, the left refuses to acknowledge that social evolution, just as they cite decades old problems that have long since been solved as ongoing reasons to acquiesce to environmentalists' and others' demands or employ revisionist history to shape the political instincts of today's young.

The problem with that is that the left is unreasonably and non-negotiably opposed to any semblance of a "live and let live" concept and will fight tooth and nail to see that every one of us is some day compressed firmly beneath the thumb of an authoritarian government, living both publicly and privately to their specifications.

I do not see that coming to fruition in what remains of my lifetime for the simple reason that it runs contrary to what we as Americans are accustomed to, in effect what flows in our veins, and when certain things are permitted to reach a "Hey, wait just a minute!" level, there will be a correction of sorts.

Although Democrats cannot come to grips with it, the election of Donald Trump in 2016 was a prime example of the above. Government had gotten so off track that things reached that "Hey, wait just a minute!" level, and we elected a non-politician to come in and fix things, which he has been doing despite an unprecedented amount of interference and attacks from the Democrats.

But I digress -- the reason I believe that the SCOTUS will continue to rule in Phillips' favor is that while Congress can pass any "act" it wants, The Court is there to rule on the letter and intent of the Constitution.
No, that last is a bit extreme. br br Contrary to... (show quote)


Wake up !

We have been under an authoritarian government ever since Trump

took the oath.

"Protect the Constitution and the people".

You would make me laugh if you weren't so deluded.

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2020 IDF International Technologies, Inc.