Menu
What's new
Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

A gay marriage proposal...

Volpone

Volpone

Zombie Hunter
OK. So apparently gay marriages are a thing now, in spite of a majority of voters opposing them, the courts have rammed them down our throats. Now we've got this thing going on with that Kentucky clerk of court and time will tell if Trump weighs in. I wonder if we could consider some common ground we could share.

Historically, monies raised by fees go towards something related to the fee--hunting license dollars go towards environmental conservation. Cigarette tax money goes to stopping smoking. Maybe we could put the money from marriage licenses towards finding a cure for homosexuality. And if they succeed, there'll be a database ready to locate those in need of the cure.

It's win-win! :)
 
Rammed down "your" throat you mean? Looks like you've been taking writing lessons from your new lover :lol:
 
Volpone said:
OK. So apparently gay marriages are a thing now, in spite of a majority of voters opposing them, the courts have rammed them down our throats. Now we've got this thing going on with that Kentucky clerk of court and time will tell if Trump weighs in. I wonder if we could consider some common ground we could share.

Historically, monies raised by fees go towards something related to the fee--hunting license dollars go towards environmental conservation. Cigarette tax money goes to stopping smoking. Maybe we could put the money from marriage licenses towards finding a cure for homosexuality. And if they succeed, there'll be a database ready to locate those in need of the cure.

It's win-win! :)
Click to expand...

Let me ask you, is the Supreme Court ruling on the legality of state legislatures passing laws as applies to the Constitution a problem for you? Because DOMA was unconstitutional from the get go on any level and that's what this was all about. We have religious freedom in this country, which includes not enforcing your particular religion on others in the guise of public service. The problem with Kim Davis is she's a liar, racist, hypocrite, homophobe and bigot that's suddenly "seen the light" and can no longer with good conscience perform the duties of her job as dictated by our constitution. So instead of resigning, she's being a puppet for the neanderthals who think otherwise.
 
jack said:
Let me ask you, is the Supreme Court ruling on the legality of state legislatures passing laws as applies to the Constitution a problem for you?
Click to expand...

Seems to me that it's a problem for the Supreme Court, who clearly ignored the Tenth Amendment.

Because DOMA was unconstitutional from the get go on any level and that's what this was all about. We have religious freedom in this country, which includes not enforcing your particular religion on others in the guise of public service. The problem with Kim Davis is she's a liar, racist, hypocrite, homophobe and bigot that's suddenly "seen the light" and can no longer with good conscience perform the duties of her job as dictated by our constitution. So instead of resigning, she's being a puppet for the neanderthals who think otherwise.
Click to expand...

You mean the Democrats? She is one. Maybe you didn't know.
 
No, it upheld the second amendment, word for word.

You're pretty fucking stupid for a fascist.
 
The Saint said:
Seems to me that it's a problem for the Supreme Court, who clearly ignored the Tenth Amendment.



You mean the Democrats? She is one. Maybe you didn't know.
Click to expand...

When 2 people are married in Kentucky, the official who marries them concludes with "By the power vested in me by the state of Kentucky, I now pronounce you" ........He does not say by the power of God, or Jesus or the Church. He says by the "power of the state". Kim Davis works for the state of Kentucky. It is the state that has the power, not her, not her county, not her religion. She is in clear violation of the law and of the oath she took. She should be removed from office.
 
As a person who's been divorced three times, Kim Davis is hardly qualified to champion the sanctity of marriage.

She's a morally relativistic, pkb'ing clown.
 
Well she claims her slate got wiped clean when she "found Jesus" so it's ok for her to be a bigot now. Doesn't make her a hypocrite at all. I'm glad Dunning let her out before Huckabee had a chance to get a photo op with her behind bars though.

She's a total piece of shit.
 
jack said:
No, it upheld the second amendment, word for word.
Click to expand...

And invoked the 14th Amendment as an excuse for the Feds to legislate on marriage, something the 14th Amendment doesn't remotely empower the Feds to do and which, therefore, the 10th explicitly prohibits them from doing.

The same reason why DOMA was unconstitutional is why removing states' rights from deciding marriage is also unconstitutional.
 
That's bullshit and you know it. Keep mouthing those platitudes if it gives you any relief, however. That's your right.

11947551_1663816743853027_7468955277155260062_n.jpg
 
Only after you explain how the 1st Amendment allows this kind of bigotry to foment.
 
jack said:
Only after you explain how the 1st Amendment allows this kind of bigotry to foment.
Click to expand...

I'll take your attempt at a red herring as an admission that you have no answer. The First Amendment has no substantive relevance to the Kim Davis situation.
 
See, what Jack has done here is apparently a trick he learned at Turdforge: "I'll answer your question, but not until you address this red herring first." Because he can't face the question I asked, he's hoping that he can propose a sufficiently compelling red herring that we'll follow it off into the weeds and never come back to the question I asked him.

Didn't work there, Gnome, won't work here either.
 
The Saint said:
I'll take your attempt at a red herring as an admission that you have no answer. The First Amendment has no substantive relevance to the Kim Davis situation.
Click to expand...

Yet that's what she is using as her defense, beggar. Your obfuscation is you used davis as a red herring and when asked to defend your position went "no this first".

Do try to keep up. you really suck at this :D

Pay the money back yet? Of course you didn't :joker:
 
I don't know who this "gnome" is you keep referring to, unless it's your new bearded lover :bigass: I mean if gnome lames are all you have I accept the fact that once again you've been beaten.

Thanks for the acknowledgement. :whistling:
 
Look, YOU brought up Davis, so you explain it.

Because you can't. You fail as always, faggot. Can't write. Stole money from people, can't even troll properly at a troll site.

Do us all a favor and suck on a car tailpipe while it's running. Now THERE'S a vape :joker:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top