Send a Message
to lides

Comments

18,921

Joined

Jan 29, 2008

Badges

lides Profile

Recent Posts

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

Actually, that has been answered. Their rights are not absolute, and they did not break the law, Jack didSorry, kiddo, he is free to exercise them and make choices for himself, he may not impose his beliefs or choices onto someone else. Furthermore, his religious beliefs do not give him the right to break the lawHobby Lobby was a narrow decision pertaining to employment benefits, it has no applicability in this case. Your regular return to this irrelevant decision only serves to illustrate your limited understanding of the decision, and you limited ability to understand logicJack was not questioning what health insurance services he needed to provide employees. The Hobby Lobby decision is entirely inapplicableNo, Jack is the sole proprietor of his beliefs. He just has no right to project them onto others in violation of those others' beliefs.  (8 hrs ago | post #20081)

Gay/Lesbian

Attorney General Seeks to Block 'Utterly Reprehensible' I...

If it were allowed to go forward, it would. This is a sound preventative move against an unconstitutional measure.  (8 hrs ago | post #13)

Gay/Lesbian

Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, even though...

The "battle" is all but over. You've lost, you just haven't acknowledged the fact yet.  (8 hrs ago | post #1969)

Gay/Lesbian

Attorney General Seeks to Block 'Utterly Reprehensible' I...

It's the right thing to do, and it will save California taxpayers money for a patently unconstitutional measure. Maybe it's time to examine that ballot initiative thing, CA?  (11 hrs ago | post #3)

Gay/Lesbian

Pediatrician Won't Treat Baby With Lesbian Moms

How does providing medical care to anyone who seeks it destroy medical ethics? In reality, providing care to those who need it is the basis of medical ethics. The denial of care to one who needs care is absolutely a breech of ethics. Perhaps, Brian, you should speak on ethics, since you obviously have noneOnly an idiot would offer such an assertion. First do no harm, stupid person, that is the core of medical ethics.  (11 hrs ago | post #760)

Gay/Lesbian

Catholic Church Waging War on Women and Gays

What relevance does this have to the topic at hand, stupid person?  (11 hrs ago | post #255784)

Gay/Lesbian

Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, even though...

Seeing as what is sought is equality under the law, that isn't a problem. An independent status is not the goalNo, captain clueless, procreation does not now, nor has it ever in the history of the United States, had any legal tie in to marriage. Grow a brain.  (11 hrs ago | post #1957)

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

No, Jack's religion, expression, and speech would be in no way impacted by providing a cake for a client with differing beliefs. You see, here again, you have failed to offer any factual proof to substantiate this foolish claim. Merely reiterating the claim does not make the claim true. "Dot5" was a nonsense claim that you have often repeated, but never substantiated, so it wasn't debunked, because you have yet to offer factual support that would illustrate your claim is trueYou continue to make this claim, but like "Dot5" you have failed to support it with facts. It looks like your multi-dot strategy was a complete failureKeep in mind, Hobby Lobby was a very narrow decision limited to the employment benefits provided by closely held businesses. It has no applicability in this case. Only a very foolish person would think that it doesSorry, kiddo, Hobby Lobby was seeking not to provide federally mandated health benefits, Jack refused to provide a service that he would provide to others. The two are not remotely correlativeSorry, kiddo, employment benefits don't correlate to denying services to certain customers who hold differing religious beliefs. As I correctly pointed out above, you have yet to provide any specific way in which any of Jack's rights would be violated by providing service. What you have done, with you childish "Dot" strategy, is confirm that you have offered no factual substantiation of your claims, you merely repeat them ad nauseum and claim to have offer specific ways in which they are true. The question remains, how SPECIFICALLY would any of Jack's rights be violated by providing service?  (22 hrs ago | post #20062)

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

He did that. That he did so does not mean his denial of service was legalThat's not according to me, that is how rights work in the real worldJack's freedom of expression was not violated, and the gay couples rights are not absolute. Their request for a service that Jack provided was certainly not illegal. Jack's denial of service on the basis of their sexual orientation was illegalNot at all. You, on the other hand, seem to have a difficult time supporting your opinions with factsYes, you made an utterly inept statement. Actually, you have made a number of utterly inept statementsIt was challenged because it was both utterly inept, and unsupported by factNo, you repeated your opinion. You do realize the two are separate things, rightIt's so cute when you prove you would rather be right than president because you know that your position was both inept and irrelevant. The dictionary definition has no bearing upon the discussion which has to do with the law. It appears that you have difficulty finding a "context " that is relevant to the threadThere is no need. You prove as much every time you post.  (23 hrs ago | post #20041)

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

This is particularly hysterical coming from you, as it is your playbook. The reality is that you often claim that the baker's rights were infringed upon, but you lack the ability to articulate specifically how you think they were infringed upon. You often make posts claiming to have make arguments you haven't. You regularly post off topic posts that fail to even so much as attempt to address the topic at hand. Each and every one of your allegations here apply directly to you.  (Yesterday | post #20002)

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

No, you have merely repeated your opinion, you have yet to provide any factual substantiation of that opinion. How specifically is the right to free exercise infringed? It looks like you are incapable of offering factual support of your inane assertions.  (Yesterday | post #19997)

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

You do realize that there is a difference between a legal definition and a dictionary definition, don't you? I would hate for you to think that the dictionary on your shelf is a law book.  (Yesterday | post #19990)

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

No, actually, you didn't. So, it sin't so much a question of comprehension on my end, bur rather one of constructing a logical and factually supported argument on your end. You keep asserting that various freedoms have been infringed upon, however you seem utterly incapable of articulating how. Until someone on your side of this debate can do so, your side will continue to lose in court.  (Yesterday | post #19973)

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

You keep repeating your assertion, but regularly failing to support it with facts or examples. The reality remains that none of those rights is absolute, and that they absolutely end when they would infringe upon the rights of another individual. While Jack may find providing the cake unpleasant or distasteful, it in no way infringes upon his free exercise or free speech. His free association as an individual does not apply to his business for purposes of illegal discrimination. Set them up again in alley 10. Do you think you can pony up some specific examples, or factual proof of your assertions rather than childishly repeating your opinion and claiming that makes your point?  (Yesterday | post #19970)

Gay/Lesbian

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

Herein lies the problem with your argument. Legally, he never had that right. The court explained this to him already. You see, you are trying to invent rights that simple do not, and never did, existWell, that would certainly explain your posts.  (Yesterday | post #19967)

Q & A with lides

Headline:

No Headline available

Hometown:

Defiance, Ohio

Neighborhood:

brow

Local Favorites:

Patrick's, The Lantern, Viva, Barrington Brewery

I Belong To:

The Human Race

When I'm Not on Topix:

I am elsewhere

Read My Forum Posts Because:

Read them or not, my opinion is my own.

I'm Listening To:

Tosca

Read This Book:

It Can Happen Here

Favorite Things:

brown paper packages tied up with strings

I Believe In:

equality