Posts by DJS

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

DJS

Rat-Again,

I want to thank you for one thing. Had it not been for your quoting Robert's dissenting opinion, I would have never read it in its entirety. I'm not alone in believing it is one of the worst, most subjective and biased dissenting opinions ever written.

Roberts is clearly suffering from AOWM syndrome. His dissent, which reads more like a fundie tirade, is sprinkled with specious statements, assertions and views that I would expect to read on this site - not from an esteemed, experience judge sitting on the SCOTUS. It reads like someone angry that society is changing, they don't like the changes and hate that their influence is waning.

100 years from now law schools will use his dissenting whine as a case example of the bigotry that flourished in this country, even at its highest levels, in the 20th and 21st Centuries. Roberts picture will be alongside the Grand Dragons of the KKK and their ilk in the 22nd century version of a textbook. Roberts should be embarrassed.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

DJS

Rat Again,

WTF did you just type about bood?

Abortion, having the right to ride the same bus or drink from the same water fountain as others whiter than you, disabilities and lots of other things also aren't mentioned in the Constitution, but the SCOTUS has made rulings on them. References to slavery were included in the Constitution as a political necessity to get the S states to ratify, which is why an amendment was required to negate that.

The more you post the more irrational and hateful you show yourself to be.

The SCOTUS exits to ensure fair treatment of all citizens based on the stated and unstated intentions of the Constitution, as interpreted by the men and women who comprise the SCOTUS at any given time (another issue you are struggling with).

The framers could not have possibly included everything that might evolve over the centuries, which the majority opinion stated and which Roberts and the other 3 dissenters CLEARLY UNDERSTAND AS THE REASON THEY HAVE THE JOB IN THE FIRST PLACE.

And replace 'marriage or 'same sex marriage' with 'slavery' and Roberts' dissenting statement would have been as equally valid, which means not valid at all. Roberts' statement: “If same-sex marriage, then polygamy” has to be one of the lamest, most fundie, reactionary statements ever. If, at some time in the future polygamy is A-Ok with US society and the SCOTUS, WTF difference does that make to him or you, other than the need to develop the legal structure to deal with divorces, etc. Polygamy and ss marriage are RELIGIOUS constructs or the constructs of societies long passed that were trying to evolve out of caves and clans.

You need professional help.

508

If she doesn't comply an orange jumpsuit is in her future

by DJS in

scotus: kentucky clerk must issue same-sex marriage licenses.

by ariane de vogue, cnn supreme court reporter.

updated 8:02 pm et, mon august 31, 2015. let's hope this is the final screech from the haters who wrap themselves in the bible - or their egoist political philosophy i doubt it will be, but let's hope..

DJS

Fish,

You've made some excellent posts recently. Thank you.

65

Here is the funeral talk outline. VERY discraceful.

by stillstuckcruz in

this is truly terrible.

i just love the statement "instead of eulogizing the deceased, use the material in this outline to give a fine witness concerning the truth.

" in other words, utterly disregard the deceased.

DJS

Great OP,

I hated this sick practice. Non dubs having to listen to this self aggrandizing marketing pitch in lieu of a respectful and dignified remembrance and celebration of the deceased's life always left disgusted.

27

Psychology: Sick of Elder Low tone slow paced talk

by Aprostate Exam in

now after 21 years in professional psychology/humanities, i love talking to brothers that adopt a slow pace in speech, and low tone of voice when they deal with the rank and cold un-associated ones.

my mirroring their present state in personality seems to psych them out for a bit.

i then tap into my fast injection of logical sense, that throws them off.

DJS

AE,

Funny insightful OP. Only an ex Dub would get this. Well done and spot on accurate.

508

If she doesn't comply an orange jumpsuit is in her future

by DJS in

scotus: kentucky clerk must issue same-sex marriage licenses.

by ariane de vogue, cnn supreme court reporter.

updated 8:02 pm et, mon august 31, 2015. let's hope this is the final screech from the haters who wrap themselves in the bible - or their egoist political philosophy i doubt it will be, but let's hope..

DJS

JG,

"Go Kim Davis!" When you go there to give her a big ole hug, just make sure you are wearing something that goes with orange.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

DJS

JG,

Yeah, I believed all of that once. A long time ago. In a galaxy far, far away. I hate that person and what he believed. JG, by all means continue to believe what you believe and be on what you think is the 'right' side of god. Please. Continue. But your beliefs haven't one single thing to do with the US Constitution and the utilitarian, for the common good protections therein.

They protect everyone, whether they believe in your god or not. You and your kind would force your beliefs down the throats of the rest of us. Marriage is a secular entity; it is a governmental interest as was pointed out on the "Orange" OP. Free and fair commerce is also a governmental interest, and they have consistently ruled that you x-tian haters can't use your religion to refuse service to gays or blacks or anyone else your hate filled god and his hate filled followers want to hate.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

DJS

JG and Rat,

Your whining is tedious and unflattering. You lost. Get over it. You are on the wrong side of history on this topic - not to mention that your kind, with each passing month and year, becomes more of a minority in this country and the other W. democracies, until, one day in the not too distant future, your kind will pass. You are dead men walking.

Perhaps this is just the last few gasps of agonal respiration. Let's hope.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

DJS

JG,

If any of the other justices had ever been involved with a hetero marriage, that would have had as much to do with their ability to rule objectively as the two justices you mention. That is a false argument. A red herring. But one mentioned routinely on the R Wing Fundie sites and by their leaders.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

DJS

SS,

Great video. I've been to West Point Military Academy several times. I've not met this gentlemen, but I have a close friend who is a counselor there, and one of their Lts. helped me with putting together an Intelligence Analysis course I taught a few years ago. "States' Rights,' when used by the Rush ditto heads, is a cover for hate.

OC,

Great post. The US Constitution was a visionary document put together by men who understood that majority rules have their place in a democracy and should be honored and protected. They also understood the rights of the individual - and those in the minority - when they crafted both our government, how the votes are tallied for the POTUS and especially the Constitution. It was and is a utilitarian, for the common good of all document.

Clearly, the R Wing and x-tian Fundies do not have a clue how the Constitution works.