Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,204 Year: 5,461/9,624 Month: 486/323 Week: 126/204 Day: 26/16 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Roy Moore, Alabama Chief Idiot back in the news yet again.
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 4 of 313 (749930)
02-10-2015 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Percy
02-10-2015 10:57 AM


...all's well with the world.
No it isn't. We still have homos and lezzies and we're making them legal. God's wrath will be upon us all. He will make storms and higher beer prices and he will make you lose your car keys. We have sinned and we must lose our keys!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Percy, posted 02-10-2015 10:57 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Larni, posted 02-10-2015 3:10 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 17 of 313 (749969)
02-10-2015 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Faith
02-10-2015 5:07 PM


...Constitution should be the supreme law of the land.
Of course I think it should.
But who's interpretation of the Constitution is to prevail? One of your churches or maybe the one branch of government Constitutionally empowered to be the final interpreter?
If you support the constitution then you must agree with the provisions giving SCOTUS the final say. Note I did not say you must agree with their rulings, but you must acknowledge the finality of those rulings in law.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 02-10-2015 5:07 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Faith, posted 02-10-2015 8:50 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 34 of 313 (750001)
02-11-2015 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Faith
02-10-2015 8:50 PM


Even Thomas Jefferson warned that SCOTUS could get too much power, and he was right.
Jefferson's opinion does not answer the question.
Whose interpretation of law is to prevail? Who is the final arbiter of what the constitution means?
Jefferson was pissed because the courts were manned by Federalists and he was a partisan Democrat. He wanted each branch of government to determine their own interpretations of what the constitution means.
Kinda dumb for such a smart guy. In such a scheme there will inevitably be conflicts of interpretation. Who decides who is right?
Marshall's logic was impeccable. Since the court's power is extended to all cases, in law and equity, arising under the constitution the court en necessitatis must interpret what the law means in order to make a ruling.
BTW,do you know what nonacquiescence is?
Edited by AZPaul3, : appaln spelln

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Faith, posted 02-10-2015 8:50 PM Faith has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(4)
Message 36 of 313 (750003)
02-11-2015 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Faith
02-11-2015 2:27 AM


From your quote:
quote:
the proper role of the federal courts is to follow the law as it is -- not as they wish it to be.
The law as it is:
quote:
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
It does not say "nor deny to any person, except homosexuals or other groups that may be unpopular with the majority, within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Edited by Admin, : Add close quote at end of last sentence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 2:27 AM Faith has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 74 of 313 (750099)
02-11-2015 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Percy
02-11-2015 12:46 PM


You're claiming harm to fundamentalist Christians when there is none.
Not so. Fundy Christians are being discriminated against for discriminating against gays.
The christians are being forced to allow gay marriage in their states like the gays were just normal USA citizens like the christians. They are being forced to comply with non-discrimination laws which discriminate against the christians' right to discriminate against others. There needs to be a law barring discrimination against discrimination.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Percy, posted 02-11-2015 12:46 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 3:07 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(7)
Message 135 of 313 (750186)
02-11-2015 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Faith
02-11-2015 3:07 PM


I also "discriminate" against Nazis who want a cake celebrating Holocaust Denial, and against the Klan who want a cake celebrating white superiority and against Muslims who want a cake saying Allah has no son, and the like.
Oh, M'lady, you still fail to comprehend.
I walk in and want to buy a regular chocolate cake from you without any special decorations. Do you think you have the right to ask my political affiliation before you decide if you want to sell me the cake?
A month later I come back and want to buy another chocolate cake from your shop. I want this one decorated with swastikas and storm trooper boots crushing a Star of David.
Since the decorations are considered political speech you are free per the first amendment to refuse to speak as I have asked.
Separate the cake (product) from the decoration (speech). The law is on your side.
Is this really beyond you? I do not think you are that dense.
You make wedding cakes which you offer to the public. I want to buy one. No special decorations, no special speech. So I select a good looking cake which you have for sale. Do you think you have the right to ask my sexual orientation before you decide if you want to sell me the cake?
A week later I come in to pick up the cake and I bring my boytoyfriend to come have a look at the beautiful cake I found and want for our wedding. Do you think you can refuse to sell me the selected cake because now you know my sexual orientation?
Separate the requirements of the laws against discrimination in a public business from your personal squeamish distaste of another human being. The law is on the side of the people.
How can you not see this as blatant discrimination? You want to insist that this discrimination is justifiable, which is sick but you are so entitled to think such things, but even you must acknowledge this action is blatant discrimination against another human being.
We the People have decided to protect other human beings from blatant discrimination. You fundy religious types are the ones who invented this minority you are so determined to harass. We the People have decided to protect these other human beings from you.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 3:07 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 8:42 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 141 of 313 (750195)
02-11-2015 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by Faith
02-11-2015 8:36 PM


Re: The jokes just keep coming
And up until quite recently the government would have agreed.
It would have up until the last few decades, certainly up until the last century.
Yes, governments evolve. The courts evolve. Society evolves. We and our institutions evolve greater recognition of the reality of the human experience. We evolve out of our intolerant and backward ways of thinking. We evolve the realization that "them" are human, too. We evolve the view that all people are equal and that all people deserve as much right as any and every other in all things.
We haven't completed the process, there is still much to do, but We the People are making progress. You and yours are falling further and further behind. You really need to catch up, Faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 8:36 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 8:54 PM AZPaul3 has replied
 Message 162 by Faith, posted 03-02-2015 7:37 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(2)
Message 158 of 313 (750275)
02-12-2015 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by Faith
02-11-2015 8:42 PM


I don't fail to comprehend, I disagree with you. VEHEMENTLY. I DESPISE what you are saying.
Not surprising since you actually do not understand the issues.
We're talking freedom of RELIGION here, not freedom of speech, which you keep trying to reduce it to.
Really, Faith, this should not be this difficult to comprehend.
In the case of the NAZI asking for objectionable decoration, which is a situation you brought up, I pointed out that any objections you may have to providing this is most appropriately a speech issue not a religion issue. There exists a clear and unambiguous right, in the "free speech" clause, to refuse.
I took away the offending decorations with no sign of political thought from the customer and asked if you think you have any right to ask about any political affiliation. The answer that should have come from you is, "No."
The reason is because without a justifiable legally recognized reason you have no right to refuse.
I then turned the table to the wedding cake.
This is the fine line which escapes you because of your religious blindness.
Without knowing the customer was gay you had no objection to service. Since the request involved no special decorations this takes away any possibility of a free speech objection. Now you find out the customer is gay. You think the First Amendment "freedom of religion" clause gives you some right to be bigoted, hateful and refuse this service. It does not!
Even with state laws saying such religious objections are legal, when a child dies because the parents refused to seek medical help based on their religious objection the parents go to jail!
When bigamists take multiple wives or under-aged wives claiming justification on religious grounds they go to jail!
When Christian preachers refuse to pay taxes claiming religious reasons they go to jail!.
The First Amendment, Faith, does NOT give religion carte blanche to justify actions that are considered illegal or abhorrent in this society. The First Amendment, Faith, does not give Christians carte blanche to be bigoted and hateful towards ANYONE.
You HAVE NO RIGHT regardless of what your abomination of the Christian religion may believe.
Actually, "We the People" have voted against gay marriage in state after state after state, but the SCOTUS don't LIKE "Us the People" so they make up their own rules.
Fool. We the People have been slowly but surely stepping in the direction of (finally) recognizing gay rights and gay marriage state-by-state for the past 30 years. Yes, with concerted bigoted Christian backlashes, but forward none the less. In the last two years the cause has reached a tipping point with, now, the majority of states and the majority of We the People recognizing that these basic human rights can no longer be denied to ANY American.
SCOTUS had plenty of opportunity to take a case and force a decision many times over many years, but there was then no recognizable consensus within the society. There is now. SCOTUS has yet to settle the question with the most obvious, the only, answer possible. That is yet to come.
Americans are ready. Court will now act.
Society is ready. Court to make shift.
Court ready to rule with national consensus.
Your abomination of the Christian religion will lose and the First Amendment is NOT there to save you but to save the rest of us FROM you!
Edited by AZPaul3, : added cites
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 8:42 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by Faith, posted 03-02-2015 5:44 PM AZPaul3 has replied
 Message 164 by Faith, posted 03-03-2015 12:08 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(2)
Message 159 of 313 (750277)
02-12-2015 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Faith
02-11-2015 8:54 PM


Re: The jokes just keep coming
I keep hearing how similar things are here and now to Nazi Germany in the 30s.
Then you and your inflammatory sources do not know a FUCKING thing about the Nazis.
How dare you compare this nation, this society, to that disease!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 8:54 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 03-02-2015 7:48 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(2)
Message 165 of 313 (751419)
03-03-2015 6:51 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by Faith
03-02-2015 5:44 PM


An event san people
It's about the event, not the persons.
Bull! You can fly that flag all day long and it still won't flutter.
The "event" is a wedding, Faith. Do you have some objection to weddings?
No ... unless it involves gays.
You object to the people, Faith!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Faith, posted 03-02-2015 5:44 PM Faith has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(3)
Message 166 of 313 (751423)
03-03-2015 7:37 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by Faith
03-02-2015 7:37 PM


Christian Tyranny
Change should reflect the will of the people at large, whose will is NOT represented by SCOTUS' peculiar "evolved" interpretations of the "evolving" Constitution.
You are supposed to be an American, Faith. You should have learned this in High School.
The entire reason for the way the Constitution, Bill of Rights, our form of government were constructed was to keep the popular tyranny, the "will of the people at large", from control.
You can have your majority rule when it comes to whether or not to place a stop sign on this street, but when the issues deal with the rights of people to live in peace, as equals in all things, your majority rule means nothing. The majority has no right to interfere with the rights of the people, any people.
We pride ourselves on government of, by and for the People. What we so conveniently forget is that in this country we try to accomplished that by giving protective powers to the Constitution, not the People!
The majority Christian tyranny of society in this country is being broken more and more every generation. We continue to try to live up to and expand the guiding principles of individual right. I am continually amazed by people who cannot comprehend, or outright reject, their own history and this, ongoing, American experiment.
[abe]
Clearly the opinion of that part of The People of which I am a part matters not one whit to you or to SCOTUS or to other liberal elements in today's society.
NOW, you begin to understand. The Constitution doesn't give a flip what the majority of the people think. When it comes to individual rights It rules, not us.
You appear to feel quite free to think of society's evolving without our input at all, but that doesn't strike you as even a bit tyrannical?
Oooo, the tyranny of Constitutional Rights! Be afraid! Be very afraid!
Edited by AZPaul3, : added by edit
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Faith, posted 03-02-2015 7:37 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Faith, posted 03-03-2015 10:25 AM AZPaul3 has replied
 Message 172 by Faith, posted 03-03-2015 10:40 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(2)
Message 167 of 313 (751425)
03-03-2015 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by Faith
03-02-2015 7:48 PM


Ignorance in extremes
There are either factual conditions and situations in America over the last decade or so that are similar to those in Nazi Germany in the thirties or there are not. This isn't a "how dare you" matter, it's similarities many people have been observing from different angles for some time now, including some people who lived through the Nazi era IN Germany. I've run across different lists from different sources. Perhaps I'll try to dig some more up.
If you or your incendiary sources have EVER talked to ANY survivors of the Nazis then you would know better. This is ignorant hyperbole in its most gross and abominable form.
Seems anything you right wingnut Christians don't like is Nazi.
Are the brown shirts, 400,000 strong, out here beating, killing and intimidating anyone who disagrees? Are there constant gun battles in Washington by the different parties? And once the Nazis came to power ... Are your shops being set afire with you inside just because you are Christian? Are the lame, disturbed and incompetent being forcibly rounded up and killed in the camps? Are we officially, openly, deliberately attacking, jailing, killing, by the hundreds each day, political opponents, Christians and any other group of people we don't like?
You haven't a FUCKING clue!
This isn't a "how dare you" matter...
How dare you and yours continue this bullshit!
Edited by AZPaul3, : adds

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 03-02-2015 7:48 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Larni, posted 03-04-2015 7:18 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 168 of 313 (751427)
03-03-2015 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Faith
03-03-2015 12:08 AM


Freeze peach
...a cake with NO writing on it but say a swastika design. Not a speech issue, right? I'm sure there are other symbols that could be offensive to somebody in the same way. Hammer and sickle? Clenched fists for Black Power maybe. I don't know, you name it. Portrait of a smiling Hitler, or Stalin or Mao. Or George Bush? Not free speech though, right?
Wow. How can an American so thoroughly NOT understand "free speech"?
Free speech is not just words, Faith. Symbols, marks, pictures, caricatures ... Faith, anything that conveys an idea is "speech" covered by First Amendment rights. Even money! (they got it right but if there was a time for another SCOTUS error that would have been the time).
The rest of your message here was covered above.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Faith, posted 03-03-2015 12:08 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Faith, posted 03-03-2015 10:26 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 173 of 313 (751456)
03-03-2015 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by Faith
03-03-2015 10:25 AM


Re: Christian Tyranny
Actually it was to keep the government tyranny from control of the people whether majority or minority. Majority rule is the foundational principle with minority rights protected.
Read The Federalist Papers.
Understand the reasons the founders did what they did.
The tyranny of the majority was to be feared as much as the tyranny of government.
Please, Faith, educate yourself before mindlessly regurgitating simplistic slogans.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Faith, posted 03-03-2015 10:25 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Faith, posted 03-03-2015 12:15 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8613
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 174 of 313 (751462)
03-03-2015 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Faith
03-03-2015 10:26 AM


Re: Freeze peach
"Speech" did get ridiculously extended by the courts over the last few decades.
Is that right? Or have we just ruled on each case as it came along?
The philosophy of the First Amendment has never wavered. Not necessarily enforced especially during war, but, as any constitutional scholar will tell you, the concept of "freedom of speech" has always been as broadly defined as possible in each and every case brought to the courts. This should make you, and everyone, very happy.
Where did you learn (or not learn) your American history?
Maybe it's me. I have a very difficult time believing people have such parochial, childish, simplistic views and knowledge of what the founders and the Constitution were trying to accomplish. No one reads beyond their 8th grade history text anymore. How can citizens and patriots be so ignorant?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Faith, posted 03-03-2015 10:26 AM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024