If you are against allowing homosexual couples and individuals exactly the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples and individuals, you are a bigot!
Exactly the same? Exactly the same? They have exactly the same opportunity to do exactly the same things that any heterosexual couple does.
I understand that you're exercising "the rule of law as an instrument of human redemption".
I understand that, mathematically, you're saying 2+2=5, for small values of 5, and if I don't toe your line, => I <= am some kind of socially reprehensible bigot, and I'm supposed to feel all bad and stuff about being Politically Incorrect, and any evil things that happen to me are my fault for refusing to buy your ersatz gospel.
My only ask of you is for the development underlying 2+2=5. On my way to the gallows for defending the truth, I should like to peruse your proof for form not following function.
No H8, just idle curiosity.
The main reason why I don't consider this to be a "sane" web site is because they refuse to acknowledge their profound bend towards conservatism.
Well, this is certainly not a social conservative website, and thus comes off as more libertarian to me.
demonstrably more conservative
I guess if you think #OccupyResoluteDesk is conservative, then you probably think Bernie Sanders is right of center. I'm curious if you could offer an example of a "sane" web site.
You wish to deny a certain group of people their rights to a contract.
Untrue. You cannot name a specific context, people, or right which I have sought to deny anyone at any time.
But don't let facts interrupt your bullying effort, which is pretty much how I view this soapbox of yours.
"Wisconsin is in turmoil," Trump told a boisterous crowd at a rally in Iowa. He pointed to the state's roads, schools and hospitals, which he said were all "a disaster."
Walker, who is leading polls in Iowa, remains one of Trump's biggest rivals in the race.
"I hear the only person beating me in Iowa is Scott Walker," he said. "I can't believe I
We don't need a government established on your (or anybody elses) religion..
So you privilege the false, secular religion by removing IT from consideration.
and showing it in your acts
When you start with Absolute Truth, and build a positive argument to support your (apparent ) contention that false is the new true, your acts will be convincing. So far, your arguments have been so much twaddle.
I'd love to see an argument that isn't an exercise in avoiding a real existential analysis, accusing me of bigotry, and then declaring victory.
Go.
System going down in 5 minutes.