Roy Moore, Alabama Chief Idiot back in the news yet again.

So you don't think the Constitution should be the supreme law of the land?

I made neither an accusation nor a claim. I asked a question. My question follows naturally from your stated position. Either you think the Constitution should be the supreme law of the land or you think states have the right to disregard it. This question doesn't call for an essay response, it's yes or no. Do you think the Constitution should be the supreme law of the land.

Good.What do you think should happen to state laws that run afoul of the Constitution?

Wonderful. That's what we call non-responsive.Just in case you're interested in answering the question I actually asked, I'll repeat it: What do you think should happen to state laws that run afoul of the the Constitution?Feel free to continue to ignore it if you like.

I'm pretty sure she just means she doesn't like what they're doing. But saying they are acting unconstitutionally sounds better.

Yeah, if only it weren't for that pesky Fourteenth Amendment screwing everything up, giving everyone equal protection of the laws.

No. It was never the case that states could override or ignore the Constitution. The only difference the Fourteenth Amendment makes is that more of the protections of the Constitution are extended to the states than was the case before. States never had authority to ignore the Constitution.There really is no end to your ignorance, is there?

You remember how businesses used to be able to refuse to serve blacks?You remember how there used to be separate drinking fountains for blacks?You remember how there used to be all kinds of laws that interfered with blacks being able to vote?You remember how blacks weren't permitted to buy houses in some parts of town?You remember how there used to be separate schools for blacks?You remember how some states had laws prohibiting blacks and white from marrying one another?All of these injustices have been reduced or eliminated because of the Fourteenth Amendment. Some people, such as yourself, would like to continue to perpetrate some of those very same injustices on gays. Fortunately, most of the country has realized that's wrong, leaving you and your little band of like-minded nuts to pull hair and rend garments about how unfair it is that you have to treat everyone fairly and not just the people you like.

We don't give special rights to gays, either. We only give them the same rights everyone else has, the right to marry the person they love. You love to crow about what the bible says, and how so many other people's beliefs are non-biblical. Here's a question for you. Where in the bible does it say it's a sin to bake a cake for a gay wedding? Give me a quote along with chapter and verse.Also, in this country, we don't base our laws on what anyone's god says. That IS in the Constitution.

Oh, by the way, the reason people keep calling you a bigot isn't because you are anti-gay (although that would be enough). It's because you insist on equating gays with "pedophiles or prostitutes or cheats and liars and thieves and murderers." So long as you do that, not only are you a bigot, you're a rather disgusting excuse for a human being, too.

But no chapter and verse, I notice.

Some of it was, certainly not all of it.

I know your interpretation of the bible condemns homosexuality, but I didn't ask about that. I asked about baking a cake for a gay wedding.

But no law in the US has enshrined that comment into law. Therefore, that's irrelevant.

Except you didn't.Baking a cake isn't participating in a ceremony. The cake isn't part of the ceremony, it's part of the afterparty.Can I assume, then, that you have no biblical basis for not baking a cake?