User Profile: Grover_Standpipe

Grover_Standpipe

Member Since: March 09, 2013

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [1] August 22, 2014 at 6:42pm

    Those aren’t disturbing behaviors. Disturbing behaviors in women are when they try to bother me to get off my butt and do something when I don’t feel like it. Crap they do to themselves is their business. If it doesn’t disturb them, it doesn’t disturb me, and if it does disturb them, they’re the only ones who can do anything about it.

  • August 22, 2014 at 3:30am

    I’m not saying they should be killed. I’m saying that the decision shouldn’t be made on the basis that they’re cute when they’re little. That’s barely a reason to get a puppy. let alone have a baby.

  • [2] August 22, 2014 at 3:24am

    Marriage is not mentioned as a right in the Constitution, Neither is the right to choose what color socks to wear in the morning or whether to have chicken or fish for dinner, but one thing that is in the Constitution is an Amendment saying that just because something isn’t specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights doesn’t make it not a right.

    Marriage definitely is a right because the Supreme Court has said it is at least a dozen times, often in language so clear that even you will have a hard time pretending to not understand:

    “This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
    Cleveland Board of Education v LaFleur

    “Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as ‘of basic importance in our society,’ rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.”
    MLB v SLJ 1996

    Equal protection of the law is also in the constitution, so marriage is equally a right for everybody, not just straight people, and not just religious people.

  • [3] August 21, 2014 at 11:58pm

    Equal protection of the law is in the Constitution, so it is not left to the power of the states to pass laws that give some of their citizens more rights than others.

    Marriage is not mentioned as a right in the Constitution, Neither is the right to choose what color socks to wear in the morning or whether to have chicken or fish for dinner, but there is an Amendment that says that just because something isn’t specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights doesn’t make it not a right.

    Marriage definitely is a right because the Supreme Court has said it is at least a dozen times, often in language so clear that even you will have a hard time pretending to not understand:

    “This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
    Cleveland Board of Education v LaFleur

    “Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as ‘of basic importance in our society,’ rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.”
    MLB v SLJ 1996

    Responses (2) +
  • [1] August 21, 2014 at 11:49pm

    No. Marriage is a right and it would be a violation of religious freedom if you could not do it without the permission of a religious authority. Civil marriage is here to stay.

    Responses (3) +
  • [-2] August 21, 2014 at 11:45pm

    A wedding is a wedding. If you do weddings it’s none of your damn business who is marrying whom.

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 11:42pm

    That ship has sailed. The government has been marrying people for so long that judges today are marrying the great grandchildren of people who were married by judges. Religion does not own the concept of marriage or the word either. 35-40% of the couples in this country choose to be married in a civil ceremony without having to seek the permission of any religious authority, and their marriages are just as real as yours. It’s not just a religious institution, and it hasn’t been for a long time.

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 11:39pm

    That is not a logical extension of the law. Churches and mosques are actual religious institutions. Businesses do not become religious institutions just because they are owned by religious people. All business owners would be religious if that was all it took to be free from the rule of law.

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 11:34pm

    Even if you understood the obvious difference between a business regulating its customers and the government regulating a business, you still would have been wrong when you said that to your wife. The first amendment doesn’t give you a right to make political speeches or preach sermons in the dining room of a restaurant any more than the second gives you the right to bring a gun there.

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 11:23pm

    Hosting weddings is part of their business. They don’t hold them all in their home. They have also had them in the refinished barn on their property and in a large events tent.

  • [-2] August 21, 2014 at 11:20pm

    The difference is that the owners of restaurants all understand that their signs are legally worthless and that they can’t really reserve the right to refuse service.

  • [1] August 21, 2014 at 7:27pm

    It wouldn’t matter. The Florida Civil Rights Act actually DOESN’T mention sexual orientation. Neither do the anti-discrinmination laws of several of the other states whose same sex marriage bans have been overturned. That doesn’t mean they don’t have an equal right to marry under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

  • [4] August 21, 2014 at 7:16pm

    Gee, maybe that’s because it is obviously the right conclusion.

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] August 21, 2014 at 7:13pm

    It’s because they were raised to be repelled by the thought of homosexuality, but they were all molested as children, and they have all had sex with animals, and they are offended that they and their families are now considered less normal than gays.

  • [3] August 21, 2014 at 7:03pm

    The voters don’t get to vote away other people’s rights.

  • [6] August 21, 2014 at 7:02pm

    Nobody is stopping God from defining marriage, but He hasn’t said a word to me about it, and I have never seen any real reason to believe any of the people who have claimed that He said anything to them.

  • [-2] August 21, 2014 at 3:14pm

    That’s a childish stereotype. I’ve met nasty and foul-tempered people with Down’s Syndrome. I’m sure they have their reasons, but like most angry people, they don’t take it out only on those who deserve it.

    Responses (1) +
  • [3] August 21, 2014 at 3:04pm

    No, you own your business, but the public has a right to purchase its services the minute that you start soliciting their business by putting up signs, designing a website, and otherwise advertising your desire for more customers than you can get privately by word of mouth.

  • August 21, 2014 at 2:57pm

    Unfortunately, the residents of every state with an outdated civil rights statute that has not yet been revised to include sexual orientation do technically still have a legal right to practice this form of discrimination. Hopefully, this will be corrected in the near future.

  • [-2] August 21, 2014 at 2:39pm

    When the Supreme Court says they are not null and void, then you have to follow them, even if you think that you know more about the law than they do.

123 To page: Go