Thanks for that highschool government lesson their Paul. As usual…you missed the point of my post. If two people want to have consensual sex, why do you, as a conservative want to enact more laws when conservatism has been about creating smaller government and fewer laws that restrict freedoms of Americans.
No, I don’t want there to be no laws…but we really don’t need to be making more laws. Say you want to have a threesome with your wife and someone else. That’s pretty licentious do you want congress enacting laws that keep you from doing that. It’s not my cup of tea, but I stand for someone else right to do that legally. Don’t you as a conservative?
Who says I do want laws punishing consensual sex? But if others do, they have a right to lobby for them, and if they work through the system to enact them, who apart from God has the wisdom to determine their law is morally wrong?
Homosexuals and cross-dressers want laws that mandate social approval for their lifestyle choices. They are suing people who won’t agree that their lifestyle as normal.
Excast
499
I dunno, the fact that you have posted dozens of times in defense of a man who believes the government should murder more than 14 million people for their sexuality kind of gives the impression that you think LGBTQ people should be punished.
I told you I’m pro free speech and the man was being hounded out of office for stating his own opinions as if he has no right to hold the views he does.
The left opposes free speech, including my defence of the free speech of someone nonleft, but diverts to name-calling and pejoratives and emotionally charged language to induce discomfort/embarrassment and shut down any defence of the right to think and express nonleft thoughts.
So you don’t want more laws to reduce human contributions to global warming?
Free speech does not mean free from consequences. Anyone who holds a public office has to accept their words have more impact than someone who does not hold public office.
Excast
503
He’s not some citizen speaking his mind on his own property. He was a law enforcement official who is expected to serve and protect the community. That is impossible when you hold a significant portion of the community in such contempt that you are openly calling for their execution. Those two do not equate in any way.
Not here in the US. I think that needs to be done elsewhere. I’m not a tree hugger are you?
You probably think that laws outlawing all pitbull type dogs…even if they aren’t pit bulls at all. You think that’s appropriate too huh?
They are suing people who don’t abide by public accommodations laws. Quit lying.
You seem confused. He has the right to hold those views. He isn’t being jailed. But we have the right to ask him to step down.
I think someone has the right to freedom of speech, except when it causes or calls for harm to other people. For example, you can’t yell “Fire!” in a crowded movie theater because it’ll cause harm and undue panic to other people.
WuWei
510
On their own property. Same difference.
No. They aren’t being sued for their thoughts. They are being sued for not abiding by PA laws. I’m just relating facts here.
PA laws are constitutional
WuWei
514
They are being sued for not submitting to The Collective’s thoughts.
Oh? Plenty of people are anti-gay and are not sued. Why do the Westboro Baptist’s still operate freely if we sue for thoughts?
No, I know you are smarter than this and you are just being hyperbolic.
What a disgusting thing to say. Such a horrible person. That he was in law enforcement too is gross. Sick sick human.
2 Likes
