Bake the cake

[This_person]

Did you not see my post where i clearly said that the Government is mad of people elected by the people. it is not some entity that controls our behavior like "god"

Yet, the point is that you do NOT think we, the people, should be able to make the decisions for our own lives ourselves. So, we're too stupid, but the group of too stupid is who is deciding who from the batch of too stupid people gets to make the decisions .

And, that makes sense to you more than each person having the right to make decisions for themselves. Surely you can see how wrong that line of thinking is now.

Do you know what the percentage of approval is in the US for marriage equality?

This year? Almost 2/3 of polled Americans believe "marriage" should be redefined to include same-sex unions. This is up from a low of 27% in 1996.

If it drops again, would you be for making same-sex "marriage" not attainable for government recognition again?

How about for legal abortion?

Only 29% of people think it should be legal in all circumstances (down from a high of 34%), with 18% saying never and 50% saying only in some circumstances (you know, like rape and "health of the mother"). So, I guess we should be able to make that illegal, right?

If you don't like the laws vote to change them, run for government or move to place that is in line with your viewpoint.

So, for example, if 57% of voters think a baker should not be forced to make a cake for a wedding that goes against the baker's religious beliefs, then you would be all about keeping it illegal to force the baker, right?

 

[stgislander]

Yet, the point is that you do NOT think we, the people, should be able to make the decisions for our own lives ourselves. So, we're too stupid, but the group of too stupid is who is deciding who gets to make the decisions from the batch of too stupid people.

And, that makes sense to you more than each person having the right to make decisions for themselves. Surely you can see how wrong that line of thinking is now.



This year? Almost 2/3 of polled Americans believe "marriage" should be redefined to include same-sex unions. This is up from a low of 27% in 1996.

If it drops again, would you be for making same-sex "marriage" not attainable for government recognition again?

Only 29% of people think it should be legal in all circumstances (down from a high of 34%), with 18% saying never and 50% saying only in some circumstances (you know, like rape and "health of the mother"). So, I guess we should be able to make that illegal, right?



So, for example, if 57% of voters think a baker should not be forced to make a cake for a wedding that goes against the baker's religious beliefs, then you would be all about keeping it illegal to force the baker, right?

I gotta give you props for really trying with Sippy, but there comes a point when you gotta just punch out.

 

[Restitution]

Jesus Christ man, how do you constantly #### up the quote feature?

Its deliberate.

I liked him better when he was Larry :shrug:

 

[Gilligan]

Its deliberate.

I liked him better when he was Larry :shrug:

Riiiggght.

 

[Restitution]

Riiiggght.

You doubt it? Do you honestly think that someone like Larry, who was on here day after day and posted 25 times a day would just up and quit?

I GUARANTEE that he is on here somewhere. My money is on Sap-my-nuts

 

[GURPS]

If you don't like the laws vote to change them, run for government .....

right, because that has worked out so well with Trumps vs entrenched bureaucrats left from the Clinton and Obama Administration
bureaucrats could not start leaking information fast enough after the election


on top of all the obstruction in congress ...........

Trump’s Michigan judicial nominee hits a snag

Washington — The Senate Judiciary Committee has not taken up the nomination of Michigan Supreme Court Justice Joan Larsen nearly two months after her selection for the federal appellate bench — a development that concerns her supporters.

The panel is waiting for the go-ahead from her home state senators, Democrats Debbie Stabenow of Lansing and Gary Peters of Bloomfield Township. They are still reviewing Larsen’s nomination, including a Michigan-specific questionnaire that she returned to the senators’ offices last week.

The committee’s custom is not to hold hearings for a judicial nominee until that nominee’s home state senators submit blue slips consenting to their moving forward.

Neither Stabenow nor Peters has publicly raised concerns about Larsen’s selection for the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, though other Democrats have.

A spokesman for Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, noted that Larsen’s nomination materials have been available for review for several weeks, including a 64-page questionnaire received by the committee June 2.

 

[GURPS]

My money is on Sap-my-nuts

I don't think so, the countenance is all wrong for Sippy Cup to be Larry

 

[This_person]

I gotta give you props for really trying with Sippy, but there comes a point when you gotta just punch out.

His protestations are getting more and more "out there" to the point even HE has to recognize he has lost the argument. I'll feel it was worthwhile if he can just call me names and leave like MR always does when he's been beaten. Then I'll know he gets he's wrong but false pride/ego will not let him express it anywhere but in his shaking hands as he types those names.

 

[Restitution]

I don't think so, the countenance is all wrong for Sippy Cup to be Larry

Of course because....

If I wanted to MPD on here, I would just do the same old thing and act the same old way I did before I quit/got booted/etc.

We saw the lib-leaning going on before Larry vanished like a fart in the wind... this is just +2 levels of crazier

 

[Sapidus]

Yet, the point is that you do NOT think we, the people, should be able to make the decisions for our own lives ourselves. So, we're too stupid, but the group of too stupid is who is deciding who from the batch of too stupid people gets to make the decisions .

And, that makes sense to you more than each person having the right to make decisions for themselves. Surely you can see how wrong that line of thinking is now.



This year? Almost 2/3 of polled Americans believe "marriage" should be redefined to include same-sex unions. This is up from a low of 27% in 1996.

If it drops again, would you be for making same-sex "marriage" not attainable for government recognition again?

Only 29% of people think it should be legal in all circumstances (down from a high of 34%), with 18% saying never and 50% saying only in some circumstances (you know, like rape and "health of the mother"). So, I guess we should be able to make that illegal, right?



So, for example, if 57% of voters think a baker should not be forced to make a cake for a wedding that goes against the baker's religious beliefs, then you would be all about keeping it illegal to force the baker, right?

Your circular arguments are truly idiotic.

I understand you don't like the government and people it should be less involved in peoples lives. Well guess what many people feel that way about religion. You can believe whatever you want to believe but when it interferes with non religious people or people of other religions that is where it ends. That is no longer religious freedom, that is an imposition others.

You keep saying people should be free and yes of course they should but it works both ways. Your definition of freedom is wrong. People need to be free of your religious constraints. No one is passing legislation to ban pork nation wide to appease muslims and jews.

 

[Sapidus]

His protestations are getting more and more "out there" to the point even HE has to recognize he has lost the argument. I'll feel it was worthwhile if he can just call me names and leave like MR always does when he's been beaten. Then I'll know he gets he's wrong but false pride/ego will not let him express it anywhere but in his shaking hands as he types those names.

God you are pathetic to think some stupid snoopy character effects me in any way. I came here to try to understand how anyone could defend Donald Trump.

So far all I've learned is that 70% of you just call me names and insult people who disagree with you and want to circle jerk of racist memes and tranny jokes. 20% are maybe willing to engage in an open dialogue but then quit when facts prove them wrong like PYS-ops. and 10% are just weirdos talking about Pizzagate or crying about how they got banned once and how unfair it was . Don't get me started on the weirdo who posts bible verses all day everyday.

And then you take offense when people think you are uneducated deplorable?

 

[Gilligan]

I came here to try to understand how anyone could defend Donald Trump.

How can you "learn" anything whilst hiding behind the "ignore" feature, you coward?

 

[GURPS]

I came here to try to SPREAD THE GOOD PROGRESSIVE WORD.

You are too stupid to understand the TRUTH as I see it.

:fixed:


what you really mean - with your condescending attitude


Brian: So, so on Monday...what happens?
Claire: Are we still friends, you mean? If we're friends now, that is?
Brian: Yeah.
Claire: Do you want the truth?
Brian: Yeah, I want the truth.
Claire: I don't think so.
Allison: With all of us, or just John?
Claire: All of us...
Andrew: That's a real nice attitude, Claire!
Claire: Oh, be honest, Andy. If Brian came walking up to you in the hall on Monday, what would you do? I mean picture this, you're there with all the sportos. I know exactly what you'd do; you'd say hi to him and when he left you'd cut him all up so your friends wouldn't think you really liked him!
Andrew: No way...
Allison: 'Kay, what if I came up to you?
Claire: Same exact thing.
Bender: You are a bitch!
Claire: Why? 'Cause I'm telling the truth, that makes me a bitch?
Bender: No! 'Cause you know how ####ty that is to do to someone! And you don't got the balls to stand up to your friends and tell 'em that you're gonna like who you wanna like!
Claire: Okay, what about you, you hypocrite! Why don't you take Allison to one of your heavy metal vomit parties? Or take Brian out to the parking lot at lunch to get high? What about Andy for that matter, what about me? What would your friends say if we were walking down the hall together. They'd laugh their asses off and you'd probably tell them you were doing it with me so they'd forgive you for being seen with me.
Bender: Don't you ever talk about my friends! You don't know any of my friends, you don't look at any of my friends and you certainly wouldn't condescend to speak to any of my friends, so you just stick to the things you know: shopping, nail polish, your father's BMW and your poor-rich-drunk mother in the Caribbean!
Claire: SHUT UP!!!
Bender: And as far as being concerned about what's gonna happen when you and I walk down the hallways at school, you can forget it! 'Cause it's never gonna happen! Just bury your head in the sand, and wait for your ####in' prom!
Claire: I hate you!
Bender: Yeah? Good!

 

[Kyle]

So.... any bets on when Sappy goes through her next name change?

 

[black dog]

So.... any bets on when Sappy goes through her next name change?

For 100 Alex, I'll go with Chicken Queen.

 

[hotbikermama40]

Your circular arguments are truly idiotic.

I understand you don't like the government and people it should be less involved in peoples lives. Well guess what many people feel that way about religion. You can believe whatever you want to believe but when it interferes with non religious people or people of other religions that is where it ends. That is no longer religious freedom, that is an imposition others.

You keep saying people should be free and yes of course they should but it works both ways. Your definition of freedom is wrong. People need to be free of your religious constraints. No one is passing legislation to ban pork nation wide to appease muslims and jews.

How in holy blazing Hell do you see a comparison between the two? No one...NO ONE...is bound by any religious constraint. The gay couple is FREE to find another bakery to bake them a cake and the baker is FREE to determine which clientele he will serve. Just like a home decorator is free to decide who's business they want. Or the DJ is free to decide who's reception or party he/she will play music for. If the baker worked at Shoppers, or Giant and refused - then there'd be an issue, since he doesn't have the authority or right to speak for the business that employs him. However, he is a private business owner - his business to 'lose' or 'suffer fallout' for refusing someone because they're gay...or a woman...or ginger-headed.

God you are pathetic to think some stupid snoopy character effects me in any way.

Oh. My. God. You're b*tch-slapping back at Snoopy?!!!

I came here to try to understand how anyone could defend Donald Trump.

Liar.

So far all I've learned is that 70% of you just call me names and insult people who disagree with you and want to circle jerk of racist memes and tranny jokes. 20% are maybe willing to engage in an open dialogue but then quit when facts prove them wrong like PYS-ops. and 10% are just weirdos talking about Pizzagate or crying about how they got banned once and how unfair it was . Don't get me started on the weirdo who posts bible verses all day everyday.

And then you take offense when people think you are uneducated deplorable?

and 100% of Sappy tries (and fails miserably) to hurl insults to anyone who disagrees with him and specifically insult religion. 100% of Sappy whines when he's called names - usually the more worked up he gets is an indicator of just how picked on he feels; and you can tell because his typos take on biblical proportion (pun intended).

YOU giving any indication that anyone is uneducated is like Hannibal Lecter telling someone their food intake is all wrong.

 

[Hijinx]

Not to be really involved in this thread , but anyone who believes Hillary would have made a better President than Donald Trump is sh1t simple.

 

[Gilligan]

YOU giving any indication that anyone is uneducated is like Hannibal Lecter telling someone their food intake is all wrong.

I'm done..I swear to gawd...LOL

 

[stgislander]

YOU giving any indication that anyone is uneducated is like Hannibal Lecter telling someone their food intake is all wrong.

I'm done..I swear to gawd...LOL

Methinks she won the Internet today with that gem.

 

[Wishbone]

This is what giving trophies to the losers gets society.

Sappy.