I notice that one of his fellow Libertarian-Trump lemmings wisely chose not to respond to my post.
A "moby" I'm told.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=moby
Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 4
- Thread starter aCultureWarrior
- Start date
- Status
I notice that one of his fellow Libertarian-Trump lemmings wisely chose not to respond to my post.
A "moby" I'm told.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=moby
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
I'll just say that between you and said Libertarian, I can't decide who is taking this 4 part thread harder.
Speaking of the right to privacy:
Let's take a stroll down memory lane and review some "Great moments in LGBTQ/ACLU history":
ACLU Argues Sex in Bathroom Stalls Is Private
Jan. 16, 2008
The American Civil Liberties Union filed an amicus brief on behalf of Sen. Larry Craig yesterday that argues people who have sex in bathroom stalls have an expectation of privacy.
The ACLU’s brief, filed with the Minnesota Court of Appeals, says the government cannot prove Craig was inviting an undercover officer to have sex when he tapped his foot in a restroom stall, the Associated Press reports. But if the state can prove there was a sex offer, it wouldn’t be illegal under a 38-year-old Minnesota Supreme Court ruling, the ACLU contends.
The ruling, State v. Bryant, reversed the conviction of two men engaged in sex in a department store restroom with the door closed. The court said in that case that the two men had an expectation of privacy.
If sex in a bathroom stall is lawful, it cannot be a crime to solicit it, the brief says. It also contends the disorderly conduct law, to which Craig pleaded guilty, is unconstitutionally overbroad since it makes offensive speech a crime and punishes the solicitation of private sex.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/aclu_argues_sex_in_bathroom_stalls_is_private/
And here I thought that this cubicle is meant for only one thing:
https://suncrestdug.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/toiletpicbigstall.jpg
To dispose of human waste.
Just call me "old fashioned".
Let's take a stroll down memory lane and review some "Great moments in LGBTQ/ACLU history":
ACLU Argues Sex in Bathroom Stalls Is Private
Jan. 16, 2008
The American Civil Liberties Union filed an amicus brief on behalf of Sen. Larry Craig yesterday that argues people who have sex in bathroom stalls have an expectation of privacy.
The ACLU’s brief, filed with the Minnesota Court of Appeals, says the government cannot prove Craig was inviting an undercover officer to have sex when he tapped his foot in a restroom stall, the Associated Press reports. But if the state can prove there was a sex offer, it wouldn’t be illegal under a 38-year-old Minnesota Supreme Court ruling, the ACLU contends.
The ruling, State v. Bryant, reversed the conviction of two men engaged in sex in a department store restroom with the door closed. The court said in that case that the two men had an expectation of privacy.
If sex in a bathroom stall is lawful, it cannot be a crime to solicit it, the brief says. It also contends the disorderly conduct law, to which Craig pleaded guilty, is unconstitutionally overbroad since it makes offensive speech a crime and punishes the solicitation of private sex.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/aclu_argues_sex_in_bathroom_stalls_is_private/
And here I thought that this cubicle is meant for only one thing:
https://suncrestdug.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/toiletpicbigstall.jpg
To dispose of human waste.
Just call me "old fashioned".
Only five?
I shudder to think of what would be left of the man after five
I've found that judges are called activist when they actually follow the constiution.
yep, none of which as any constitutional basis.
In defense of the judges i can only imagine the number of death threats they and their families received from conservative Christians if they didn't ignore rule the way they did.
They don't advocate gay sex either.
Trannies for Trump!
http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/12/Jenner-Trump-2-Getty.jpg
Feel better now?
I wasn't aware that murder should be a 'states rights issue', perhaps we should ask our resident Constitutional scholar MrDante to weigh in on this?
Marriage Equality ‘Settled’ but Abortion Isn’t: Trump Contradicts on ‘60 Minutes’
11-14-16
In an interview on Sunday night with CBS News’ 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl, Donald Trump discussed reproductive rights explicitly for the first time since being elected the 45th president of the United States.
In reply to Stahl’s question about whether he will follow through on his campaign promise to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling by the Court that made abortion legal — and the right to abortion care access a constitutionally protected right — on a federal level, Trump replied that his appointees would, in fact, be “pro-life” and that “if [Roe] were overturned, it would go back to the states.”Stahl followed up by clarifying that if this chain of events were to happen, “some women won’t be able to get an abortion,” to which Trump eventually conceded that, should Roe be overturned and abortion access be legally defined by each individual state in the U.S., women will “perhaps have to go, they’ll have to go to another state.”
“And that’s OK?” Stahl asked. “Well, we’ll see what happens,” Trump replied. “It’s got a long way to go.”
But later in the interview, Stahl asked Trump about whether he supported marriage equality.
The president-elect answered, “It’s irrelevant because it was already settled. It’s law. It was settled in the Supreme Court. I mean it’s done,” thus setting up an odd logical paradigm by which some things previously addressed by the Supreme Court, like abortion access, are left open to challenge while other things, like marriage equality, are defined as resolved because of a previous Supreme Court ruling.
“Obviously, Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for over forty years,” Brigitte Amiri, a senior staff attorney in the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) Reproductive Freedom Project. “In that case, the Supreme Court declared that the right to abortion is a fundamental constitutional right. Lower courts have chipped away at this right, but the Supreme Court has upheld that abortion is a core constitutional right in other landmark cases like Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992 and Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstadt just this past June. It’s baffling, to say the least, that there’s any distinction between those rulings that establish the constitutional right to abortion and Obergefell v. Hodges, which upholds marriage equality.”
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/gay-ma...rump-contradicts-on-60-minutes-164414012.html
Let me help you with your confusion Donald:
The reason Roe v Wade is unconstitutional is because it violates the Due Process Clause in both the 5th and 14th Amendments. One state cannot make abortion legal and another illegal as you suggest. In order for a woman to have an abortion she must first prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law that her life would be endangered if she was to carry the pregnancy to full term (thank you Senator Ted Cruz and the late Anton Scalia for that bit of wisdom).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Regarding 'marriage equality': While our Founding Fathers detested homosexual acts and didn't write the Constitution for anyone other than a moral and religious people, both Lawrence v Texas and Obergefell v Hodges are unconstitutional because there is nowhere in any founding documents where it says that people have some kind of 'right' to engage in immoral behavior. The issue of homosexuality should be returned to the respective states to make those decisions on their own (and the federal government should not bail these states out after they realize that things like free HIV/AIDS drugs is bankrupting their state).
http://image.slidesharecdn.com/due-process-1226884024861937-8/95/due-process-2-728.jpg?cb=1226855245
http://image.slidesharecdn.com/due-process-1226884024861937-8/95/due-process-2-728.jpg?cb=1226855245
Marriage Equality ‘Settled’ but Abortion Isn’t: Trump Contradicts on ‘60 Minutes’
11-14-16
In an interview on Sunday night with CBS News’ 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl, Donald Trump discussed reproductive rights explicitly for the first time since being elected the 45th president of the United States.
In reply to Stahl’s question about whether he will follow through on his campaign promise to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling by the Court that made abortion legal — and the right to abortion care access a constitutionally protected right — on a federal level, Trump replied that his appointees would, in fact, be “pro-life” and that “if [Roe] were overturned, it would go back to the states.”Stahl followed up by clarifying that if this chain of events were to happen, “some women won’t be able to get an abortion,” to which Trump eventually conceded that, should Roe be overturned and abortion access be legally defined by each individual state in the U.S., women will “perhaps have to go, they’ll have to go to another state.”
“And that’s OK?” Stahl asked. “Well, we’ll see what happens,” Trump replied. “It’s got a long way to go.”
But later in the interview, Stahl asked Trump about whether he supported marriage equality.
The president-elect answered, “It’s irrelevant because it was already settled. It’s law. It was settled in the Supreme Court. I mean it’s done,” thus setting up an odd logical paradigm by which some things previously addressed by the Supreme Court, like abortion access, are left open to challenge while other things, like marriage equality, are defined as resolved because of a previous Supreme Court ruling.
“Obviously, Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for over forty years,” Brigitte Amiri, a senior staff attorney in the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) Reproductive Freedom Project. “In that case, the Supreme Court declared that the right to abortion is a fundamental constitutional right. Lower courts have chipped away at this right, but the Supreme Court has upheld that abortion is a core constitutional right in other landmark cases like Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992 and Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstadt just this past June. It’s baffling, to say the least, that there’s any distinction between those rulings that establish the constitutional right to abortion and Obergefell v. Hodges, which upholds marriage equality.”
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/gay-ma...rump-contradicts-on-60-minutes-164414012.html
Let me help you with your confusion Donald:
The reason Roe v Wade is unconstitutional is because it violates the Due Process Clause in both the 5th and 14th Amendments. One state cannot make abortion legal and another illegal as you suggest. In order for a woman to have an abortion she must first prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law that her life would be endangered if she was to carry the pregnancy to full term (thank you Senator Ted Cruz and the late Anton Scalia for that bit of wisdom).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Regarding 'marriage equality': While our Founding Fathers detested homosexual acts and didn't write the Constitution for anyone other than a moral and religious people, both Lawrence v Texas and Obergefell v Hodges are unconstitutional because there is nowhere in any founding documents where it says that people have some kind of 'right' to engage in immoral behavior. The issue of homosexuality should be returned to the respective states to make those decisions on their own (and the federal government should not bail these states out after they realize that things like free HIV/AIDS drugs is bankrupting their state).
http://image.slidesharecdn.com/due-process-1226884024861937-8/95/due-process-2-728.jpg?cb=1226855245
http://image.slidesharecdn.com/due-process-1226884024861937-8/95/due-process-2-728.jpg?cb=1226855245
Last edited:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Considering nobody besides yourself seems to take the thing remotely seriously then therein lies your answer dude...
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Trannies for Trump!
http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/12/Jenner-Trump-2-Getty.jpg
Feel better now?
is that you on the left?
Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I'll just say that between you and said Libertarian, I can't decide who is taking this 4 part thread harder.
Just when were you authorized to speak for people other than yourself Arthurrrr?
Regarding Trannies for Trump!:
Now now library boy, be respectful of your President's cross dressing friends. Word has it that Donald might even offer Brucie a Cabinet Position:
Official Decorator of the White House Rainbow Room.
I'll just say that between you and said Libertarian, I can't decide who is taking this 4 part thread harder.
Just when were you authorized to speak for people other than yourself Arthurrrr?
Regarding Trannies for Trump!:
Now now library boy, be respectful of your President's cross dressing friends. Word has it that Donald might even offer Brucie a Cabinet Position:
Official Decorator of the White House Rainbow Room.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Calling you "Art" sounds too manly...
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Your
I didn't think so; thanks for stopping by.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Let's see who President Elect Donald Trump has named as his Chief of Staff:
Surprise, surprise! Yet another pro LGBTQ'er, GOP chairman Reince Priebus.
Reince Priebus named Trump’s chief of staff
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eince-priebus-named-as-trumps-chief-of-staff/
A little bit of history about Priebus, a supposed conservative.
March 26, 2013
Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus, on USA TODAY's Capital Download, says the party shouldn't act 'like Old Testament heretics' on same-sex marriage but should welcome those who support it.
WASHINGTON -- The GOP platform leaves no doubt about its absolute opposition to same-sex marriage, but Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus says the party needs to welcome those with other views on a combustible issue that will be considered by the Supreme Court today.
"We do have a platform, and we adhere to that platform," Priebus said in an interview Monday on USA TODAY's Capital Download video series. "But it doesn't mean that we divide and subtract people from our party" who support the right of gay men and lesbians to marry.
"I don't believe we need to act like Old Testament heretics," he said, saying Republicans "have to strike a balance between principle and grace and respect."..
Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/03/25/priebus-rnc-gay-marriage/2017901/
Priebus says gay convention speaker [Peter Thiel] is 'welcome in our party'
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...says-gay-convention-speaker-is-welcome-in-our
But wait! There's more!
Trump considering openly homosexual man as UN Ambassador
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/
Is the picture getting a little more clear for those of you that actually fell for Donald Trump's lies about being a social conservative?
http://www.firebreathingchristian.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/TrumpLGBTFan.jpg
Surprise, surprise! Yet another pro LGBTQ'er, GOP chairman Reince Priebus.
Reince Priebus named Trump’s chief of staff
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eince-priebus-named-as-trumps-chief-of-staff/
A little bit of history about Priebus, a supposed conservative.
March 26, 2013
Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus, on USA TODAY's Capital Download, says the party shouldn't act 'like Old Testament heretics' on same-sex marriage but should welcome those who support it.
WASHINGTON -- The GOP platform leaves no doubt about its absolute opposition to same-sex marriage, but Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus says the party needs to welcome those with other views on a combustible issue that will be considered by the Supreme Court today.
"We do have a platform, and we adhere to that platform," Priebus said in an interview Monday on USA TODAY's Capital Download video series. "But it doesn't mean that we divide and subtract people from our party" who support the right of gay men and lesbians to marry.
"I don't believe we need to act like Old Testament heretics," he said, saying Republicans "have to strike a balance between principle and grace and respect."..
Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/03/25/priebus-rnc-gay-marriage/2017901/
Priebus says gay convention speaker [Peter Thiel] is 'welcome in our party'
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...says-gay-convention-speaker-is-welcome-in-our
But wait! There's more!
Trump considering openly homosexual man as UN Ambassador
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/
Is the picture getting a little more clear for those of you that actually fell for Donald Trump's lies about being a social conservative?
http://www.firebreathingchristian.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/TrumpLGBTFan.jpg
Clear as a bell !!! :rotfl:Let's see who President Elect Donald Trump has named as his Chief of Staff:
Surprise, surprise! Yet another pro LGBTQ'er, GOP chairman Reince Priebus.
Reince Priebus named Trump’s chief of staff
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eince-priebus-named-as-trumps-chief-of-staff/
A little bit of history about Priebus, a supposed conservative.
March 26, 2013
Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus, on USA TODAY's Capital Download, says the party shouldn't act 'like Old Testament heretics' on same-sex marriage but should welcome those who support it.
WASHINGTON -- The GOP platform leaves no doubt about its absolute opposition to same-sex marriage, but Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus says the party needs to welcome those with other views on a combustible issue that will be considered by the Supreme Court today.
"We do have a platform, and we adhere to that platform," Priebus said in an interview Monday on USA TODAY's Capital Download video series. "But it doesn't mean that we divide and subtract people from our party" who support the right of gay men and lesbians to marry.
"I don't believe we need to act like Old Testament heretics," he said, saying Republicans "have to strike a balance between principle and grace and respect."..
Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/03/25/priebus-rnc-gay-marriage/2017901/
Priebus says gay convention speaker [Peter Thiel] is 'welcome in our party'
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...says-gay-convention-speaker-is-welcome-in-our
But wait! There's more!
Trump considering openly homosexual man as UN Ambassador
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/
Is the picture getting a little more clear for those of you that actually fell for Donald Trump's lies about being a social conservative?
http://www.firebreathingchristian.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/TrumpLGBTFan.jpg
- Status