Jump to content

Christians and the GOP'ers are on the move. This time it's gay marriage and more.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, EvilBird said:

Some Dem voters sure as hell are trying...

I got a friend that his Lib Wife keeps saying their 10 year old daughter is gay ...put up pride flags around the house and everything to "make her more comfortable"  

All because she claims the kid said some girls are pretty.... its fucking unreal ¬¬

Some of these people are raising a whole generation of misfits, who will forever be saddled with mental illness, depression and more.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

Some of these people are raising a whole generation of misfits, who will forever be saddled with mental illness, depression and more.  

Well you have to have a degree of mental illness to be a liberal. So maybe they want this 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Rigid1 said:

Shouldn't be long till half his shit is gone!! :lol:

No you don’t understand Dripperese

HE SPORT FUCKS HIS WIFE!!!!!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, f7ben said:

No you don’t understand Dripperese

HE SPORT FUCKS HIS WIFE!!!!!

Lol, dripper is Pete?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ACE said:

Well you have to have a degree of mental illness to be a liberal. So maybe they want this 

Perpetually aggrieved.  They can all die in a fire.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Rigid1 said:

Lol, dripper is Pete?

No lol , Dripper is Drifter. He’s an OG and maybe the most retarded person I’ve ever encountered. He’s also a good dude and liked by all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, f7ben said:

No lol , Dripper is Drifter. He’s an OG and maybe the most retarded person I’ve ever encountered. He’s also a good dude and liked by all. 

Never seen drifter on here, must have been before my time..:thumbsup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rigid1 said:

Never seen drifter on here, must have been before my time..:thumbsup:

I think I saw washupmxer called dripper on this site. Could be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Steve753 said:

I think I saw washupmxer called dripper on this site. Could be wrong.

That is correct 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

All you have to do is look at who is putting these little things front and center, the democrats, trying hard to paint the GOP in some type of negative light when it really is an issue that most could care less about.

They are trying hard to get back to issues where they were "winning" before the pandemic and trump changed them...and ignoring the economy.  Do you really thing some lower class people care about getting married to their gay girlfriend/boyfriend?  Nope, higher class, elite issues that the lower class and middle could care less about.

Edited by racer254
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, racer254 said:

All you have to do is look at who is putting these little things front and center, the democrats, trying hard to paint the GOP in some type of negative light when it really is an issue that most could care less about.

They are trying hard to get back to issues where they were "winning" before the pandemic and trump changed them...and ignoring the economy.  Do you really thing some lower class people care about getting married to their gay girlfriend/boyfriend?  Nope, higher class, elite issues that the lower class and middle could care less about.

You mean Democrats like Clarence Thomas or maybe Lauren Boebert who says that the government should follow the teachings of the church? 🤷🏻

Edited by Jimmy Snacks
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Jimmy Snacks said:

You mean Democrats like Clarence Thomas or maybe Lauren Boebert who says that the government should follow the teachings of the church? 🤷🏻

He was referring to the liberal dems who swore up and down gay marriage would not turn into advocating grooming kids in school and then lying about it... or that kids would be shitting in litter boxes in school...

But yeah, Boebert made a speech...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Mainecat said:

When you get personal I’ve succeeded in triggering who you really are….just a puny little snot nosed low class follower.

 

Triggered 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Careful what you wish for.

I guarantee this isn't the last issue that will get tied up in partisan politics.  These rulings may not seem a big deal to a lot of us, but down the road. . . . ?  They are setting a precedence on the interpretation and change process.

It will not be long before they are deciding on issues that are close to home. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Snake said:

He was referring to the liberal dems who swore up and down gay marriage would not turn into advocating grooming kids in school and then lying about it... or that kids would be shitting in litter boxes in school...

But yeah, Boebert made a speech...

What’s the matter…Racer can’t speak for himself and her “speech”was a direct affront to The Constitution…apparently you play partisan games with that as well.🤷🏻

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Jimmy Snacks said:

What’s the matter…Racer can’t speak for himself and her “speech”was a direct affront to The Constitution…apparently you play partisan games with that as well.🤷🏻

How does it effect you?  You planning on getting married to a gay person?  This is a non issue brought up by a liberal on this forum and would not get any attention with normal people of the world.  Do you know what % of Americans want to do this vs the liberal dems that keep trying to bring it up?  They are just reaching for shit that they can use to cause a divide as the pandemic and the economy is bringing people together .

Edited by racer254
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

:news:  Seems the way it should be.  

In a rare interview, the former solicitor general of Texas insisted that underlying his mission is not religious belief or political ideology or personal animus, but an unflinching conviction that federal courts must interpret the Constitution closely and cannot declare new rights not explicitly afforded in that document.

Edited by Highmark
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jimmy Snacks said:

What’s the matter…Racer can’t speak for himself and her “speech”was a direct affront to The Constitution…apparently you play partisan games with that as well.🤷🏻

Democrats are single-handedly removing god from the universe and turning youth into faggots. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, racer254 said:

How does it effect you?  You planning on getting married to a gay person?  This is a non issue brought up by a liberal on this forum and would not get any attention with normal people of the world.  Do you know what % of Americans want to do this vs the liberal dems that keep trying to bring it up?  They are just reaching for shit that they can use to cause a divide as the pandemic and the economy is bringing people together .

No, he’s just a dnc talking point sock puppet, a fucking dope of the worst order.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, favoritos said:

Careful what you wish for.

I guarantee this isn't the last issue that will get tied up in partisan politics.  These rulings may not seem a big deal to a lot of us, but down the road. . . . ?  They are setting a precedence on the interpretation and change process.

It will not be long before they are deciding on issues that are close to home. 

Yep. I'm still uncertain as to how I feel about this ruling because of the concept pointed out in your post. It remains to be seen what will be the long term ramifications of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kivalo said:

Yep. I'm still uncertain as to how I feel about this ruling because of the concept pointed out in your post. It remains to be seen what will be the long term ramifications of this.

Well then maybe the group elected to congress can get back to work and enact new law as they are supposed to do and not let the court who does not have that authority, rule only on the existing law that they are bound to.

This is the correction you cant make new law from the bench. What they did in the past was incorrect and should have been corrected immediately but the liberals in charge didnt have the balls to bring it to vote in chamber and transferred there obligation to the court.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is truly wanted by a majority then congress no matter what the makeup is should be able to get it done.

If they cant or wont then it is congress that is dysfunctional, It is not a matter for the SC it is a matter of congress to formulate and enact new law. 

Also if congress passes a poorly formulated and written law and it gets evicerated by the SC. That goes back on congress for doing a poor job in the first place. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...