PRESIDENT TRUMP!

[Erni]

I'm just hoping Trump reinstates slavery. My life would be so much easier if I didn't have to do yard work or shovel snow.



(That is the kind of stuff Hillary's supporters are expecting, isn't it?)

Quit trolling ray, some sjw will quote you and use your sarcasm as proof or something heinous.

[Skip]

And once it gets physical like that they should be arrested and charged with a crime.

For the baker, I agree that they shouldn't have been forced to do what they didn't want to do in their own business. But the gov't is there for all citizens' protection, and the services provided like record keeping of marriage licenses shouldn't be denied just because someone's way of life that has no actual way of hurting you is different from yours. If you feel that your marriage is somehow less valid to you because 2 men or 2 women get married at a courthouse then your marriage isn't as strong as you think and you might want to reconsider some life choices. I see way too many people acting like whiney little SJW's who need a safe space because two guys that they don't know and will never meet got married and live together with the same legal protections and responsibilities that they and their 3rd wife enjoy.

They should be arrested and charged for sure. But that means the First Amendment only protects us when there is a competent LEO in our vicinity. That's kind of hard and why a lot of us carry. I think we would agree if you need a 911 call to exercise a right, it's probably not a protected right.

The state in the Masterpiece case took those two guys that the baker didn't know, forced the baker to associate with them, contradict his own conscious/religious belief, and provide an accommodation that was freely available from other bakers in the nearby area (i.e. there was no denial of a public accommodation).

The baker didn't wake up thinking "Nice day today, it's a fine day for oppressing some icky gays by refusing to compromise my faith." Nor did he ask for a safe space.

But none the less, the First Amendment is dead with cases like these. And just because the government intervened in a way you support (this one time) doesn't change that fact.

[davsel]

I'm just hoping Trump reinstates slavery. My life would be so much easier if I didn't have to do yard work or shovel snow.

(That is the kind of stuff Hillary's supporters are expecting, isn't it?)

Not when you consider the fact you are solely responsible for keeping your slaves fed, sheltered, and generally healthy.
Turns out to not be cost effective I hear.

[brutal]

Not when you consider the fact you are solely responsible for keeping your slaves fed, sheltered, and generally healthy.
Turns out to not be cost effective I hear.

The ~$35k in Fed taxes my wife and I paid in 2015 doesn't appear to be cost effective either.

[TFOGGER]

§ 502. Enlistment oath: who may administer(a) Enlistment Oath.— Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:

"I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the(lawful) orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

THIS is what members of our military(enlisted) have sworn. Note that there is nothing in there (nor the Constitution) about adhering to a given moral code, nor upholding the beliefs of any one religion, nor about sexual preference, "natural law" or any other such nonsense. Why on Earth do people insist on trying to impose their morality on others, and continually attempting to leverage the government into doing the same? As long as it doesn't directly impact my rights, whatever 2 or more consenting adults do with each other is irrelevant.

[sroz]

THIS is what members of our military(enlisted) have sworn. Note that there is nothing in there (nor the Constitution) about adhering to a given moral code, nor upholding the beliefs of any one religion, nor about sexual preference, "natural law" or any other such nonsense. Why on Earth do people insist on trying to impose their morality on others, and continually attempting to leverage the government into doing the same? As long as it doesn't directly impact my rights, whatever 2 or more consenting adults do with each other is irrelevant.

Please don't try to bring normalcy and common sense into the conversation. Isn't that what separates most of us from the intolerant folks on the left?

[TFOGGER]

Please don't try to bring normalcy and common sense into the conversation. Isn't that what separates most of us from the intolerant folks on the left?

Sorry, forgot that this is the internet...

[Skip]

THIS is what members of our military(enlisted) have sworn. Note that there is nothing in there (nor the Constitution) about adhering to a given moral code, nor upholding the beliefs of any one religion, nor about sexual preference, "natural law" or any other such nonsense. Why on Earth do people insist on trying to impose their morality on others, and continually attempting to leverage the government into doing the same? As long as it doesn't directly impact my rights, whatever 2 or more consenting adults do with each other is irrelevant.

I remember that vividly.

Here's the 10th Amendment I'll quote for the second time today...

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Marriage was delegated to the states. The power to license, dissolve, and administer AND/OR the power to stay out of it and delegate directly to the People (a more Libertarian solution many have proposed [and I think makes a lot of sense personally]). If a state decided that gay marriage was illegal that was not only lawful but upholding that law was mandated by the Constitution. The one I swore to uphold.

So twice now people have said "but the oath to the Constitution!" And I have to ask: Which constitution? Cause my copy says gay marriage is still illegal in Colorado and if we want to change that there was a lawful process for doing so. In fact, that was the only way of doing so under the Constitution (Fed and state in this case).

In 1974 the same thing happened with abortion. States had laws prohibiting and there was no amendment to delegate this power to FedGov. But USSC rammed it down everyone's throat as well.

What we have now is not Republicanism and the Constitution is dead. The promotion of social issues as a justification for shredding the law is one reason why this has happened. And we may very well have gotten to the same place on some issues with the Constitution intact.

So some say "the system works" while it's not the system we are promised by law and others say "we had to break the system so it would work." The only consistency is that we get further from the Constitution.

I need a drink...

[Gman]

The anti-Trump rally is kicking off at the Capitol building. You're already late if you haven't already headed that way.

These people protesting about Trump should be angry at their media. They were being lied to for so long and they believed it so the reality is hitting them hard.

Republicans had to give Obama a chance, so how about waiting until Trump is even sworn in?

[sroz]

Bet all the pot edibles are gone.