1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
123 registered members (curt99rsv, Ridge Life, Dubie, !shiloh!, BPI, jhardy, Claims Rep., slippinlipjr, quack, rhino21, Pwyse, GomerPyle, Fishduck, Bamarich2, Dean, BRP549, gastoka, cartervj, RCHRR, treemydog, RockFarmer, Jmfire722, Herdbull, MC21, RareBreed, MarksOutdoors, Stoney, Brian_C, tombo51, Turkeyneck78, buzzard, Andalusia, Forrestgump1, TurkeyJoe, Jbf, Moose24, Solothurn, k bush, SnipeHunter, JohnG, CNC, desertdog, Canterberry, Okatuppa, foldemup, fi8shmasty, AU7MM08, sawdust, Young20, top cat, CouchNapper, Nowlide, icducks, stuball, IDOT, sj22, furnfeather, lckrn, BigEd, stl32, Overland, turkey_killer, Ridgehunter36, JLMiller, Jtb51b, M48scout, BCLC, IMISSALDEER, jarcher38, thayerp81, Huntn2feed5, leroyb, todd w, m2ruger, FNG68, coldtrail, hunterturf, Happysappy, Chancetribe, deadeye48, jaredhunts, UncleHuck, Nightwatchman, Gobble4me757, chill, Mack1, Team_Stuckem, Wapiti55, jsmith, gman, Thisldu, Ant67, Guru, JHL, Dixiepatriot, odocoileus, dawgdr, BC_Reb, GATA87, huntingnoob, joe sixpack, auwild, bama7x57, BigA47, bfoote, SwampHunter, jb20, sbo1971, roll_tide_hunts, ColeT, GmeHunter, WEMOhunter, 11 invisible),
320
guests, and 0
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
#2318015
12/04/17 12:20 PM
12/04/17 12:20 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 44,211 North Alabama
Wiley Coyote
OP
Freak of Nature
|
OP
Freak of Nature
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 44,211
North Alabama
|
The US Supreme Court upheld the entire Trump travel ban today. This is a great move for the sovereignty of the US and protection of her citizens.
Now to shut down sanctuary cities.
I firmly believe that a double gallows should be constructed on the East Lawn of The White House. Politicians who willfully and shamelessly violate their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America should be swiftly tried and, upon conviction, publicly hanged at sunup the day after conviction. If multiple convicts are to be hanged they can choose with whom to share the gallows or names shall be drawn from the hangman's hat to be hanged 2 at a time.
NRA Life Member
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: SouthBamaSlayer]
#2318029
12/04/17 12:30 PM
12/04/17 12:30 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,535 D'Iberville, MS
MS_Hunter
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,535
D'Iberville, MS
|
Now if only we could get rid of the liberal judges that shot it down to begin with..... This is a major problem in this country
In your darkest hour when the demons come, call on me brother and we'll fight them together.
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: SouthBamaSlayer]
#2318030
12/04/17 12:31 PM
12/04/17 12:31 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,086 TN
Reaper
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,086
TN
|
Now if only we could get rid of the liberal judges that shot it down to begin with..... Dilly Dilly!
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: SouthBamaSlayer]
#2318039
12/04/17 12:35 PM
12/04/17 12:35 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 44,211 North Alabama
Wiley Coyote
OP
Freak of Nature
|
OP
Freak of Nature
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 44,211
North Alabama
|
Now if only we could get rid of the liberal judges that shot it down to begin with..... Let the impeachments begin!
I firmly believe that a double gallows should be constructed on the East Lawn of The White House. Politicians who willfully and shamelessly violate their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America should be swiftly tried and, upon conviction, publicly hanged at sunup the day after conviction. If multiple convicts are to be hanged they can choose with whom to share the gallows or names shall be drawn from the hangman's hat to be hanged 2 at a time.
NRA Life Member
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Wiley Coyote]
#2318270
12/04/17 02:50 PM
12/04/17 02:50 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 52,068 Round ‘bout there
Clem
Mildly Quirky
|
Mildly Quirky
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 52,068
Round ‘bout there
|
If I read it correctly, on Tuesday SCOTUS will hear arguments about the baker who refused to create/make a cake for the gay couple and was sued for discrimination.
"Hunting Politics are stupid!" - Farm Hunter
"Bible says you shouldn't put sugar in your cornbread." Dustin, 2013
"Best I can figure 97.365% of the general public is a paint chip eating, mouth breathing, certified dumbass." BCLC, 2020
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Clem]
#2318360
12/04/17 03:27 PM
12/04/17 03:27 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 44,211 North Alabama
Wiley Coyote
OP
Freak of Nature
|
OP
Freak of Nature
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 44,211
North Alabama
|
If I read it correctly, on Tuesday SCOTUS will hear arguments about the baker who refused to create/make a cake for the gay couple and was sued for discrimination.
Yep! That's gonna be heard tomorrow. I pray that the baker wins.
I firmly believe that a double gallows should be constructed on the East Lawn of The White House. Politicians who willfully and shamelessly violate their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America should be swiftly tried and, upon conviction, publicly hanged at sunup the day after conviction. If multiple convicts are to be hanged they can choose with whom to share the gallows or names shall be drawn from the hangman's hat to be hanged 2 at a time.
NRA Life Member
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Wiley Coyote]
#2318482
12/04/17 04:17 PM
12/04/17 04:17 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,916 USA
Remington270
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,916
USA
|
If I read it correctly, on Tuesday SCOTUS will hear arguments about the baker who refused to create/make a cake for the gay couple and was sued for discrimination.
Yep! That's gonna be heard tomorrow. I pray that the baker wins. A win for the gay couple amounts to forced labor.
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Wiley Coyote]
#2318511
12/04/17 04:26 PM
12/04/17 04:26 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 52,068 Round ‘bout there
Clem
Mildly Quirky
|
Mildly Quirky
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 52,068
Round ‘bout there
|
Unsure if SCOTUS will rule on that tomorrow.
Definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out. I'll bet they side with the couple, citing that it would be discriminatory to decline service because of their sexual orientation.
"Hunting Politics are stupid!" - Farm Hunter
"Bible says you shouldn't put sugar in your cornbread." Dustin, 2013
"Best I can figure 97.365% of the general public is a paint chip eating, mouth breathing, certified dumbass." BCLC, 2020
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Clem]
#2318520
12/04/17 04:30 PM
12/04/17 04:30 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,916 USA
Remington270
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,916
USA
|
Unsure if SCOTUS will rule on that tomorrow.
Definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out. I'll bet they side with the couple, citing that it would be discriminatory to decline service because of their sexual orientation.
I wonder if they’d make the baker make a cake that says “all cake bakers are bastards and don’t deserve to live in our town”? He’d be refusing service using similar logic that it’s offensive to him.
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Clem]
#2318566
12/04/17 04:49 PM
12/04/17 04:49 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 26,466 Fayetteville TN Via Selma
jawbone
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 26,466
Fayetteville TN Via Selma
|
Unsure if SCOTUS will rule on that tomorrow.
Definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out. I'll bet they side with the couple, citing that it would be discriminatory to decline service because of their sexual orientation.
From my understanding and one of our resident attorneys are welcome to correct me if I'm wrong, but they are only going to hear the case tomorrow. They won't rule on it for months because all the law clerks have to do their research for them and give their opinions to the justices. As to the merits of the case, it was clearly discrimination under the STATE law, but the way I see it is; does the state law trump the baker's right to religious freedom? Homosexuality is not a protected class under federal law, only in certain states, but freedom from religious persecution is federally protected. If this was on a playground you would have two kids yelling that "my discrimination is bigger than yours."
Lord, please help us get our nation straightened out.
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Wiley Coyote]
#2318748
12/04/17 10:11 PM
12/04/17 10:11 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 18,080 Andalusia, Al. Covington Co.
DEADorALIVE
Old Mossy Horns
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 18,080
Andalusia, Al. Covington Co.
|
Afraid the baker's going to lose this one...
Well behaved women never make history.~ Out back Quit laughing...I think I broke something.
Fifteen is my limit on Schnitzen-Gruben, Baby...
I have OCD and ADD, so everything has to be perfect, but only for a minute.
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Clem]
#2318775
12/05/17 01:55 AM
12/05/17 01:55 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,484 Bham
Dallas County
Booner
|
Booner
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,484
Bham
|
Unsure if SCOTUS will rule on that tomorrow.
Definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out. I'll bet they side with the couple, citing that it would be discriminatory to decline service because of their sexual orientation.
Yea, but the baker is a victim of violation of his relegious beliefs.
not sure what the best way to handle them is but they shouldnt be on tv and gettn married and raisin kids
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Wiley Coyote]
#2318781
12/05/17 02:08 AM
12/05/17 02:08 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 10,825 northport
deadeye48
Booner
|
Booner
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 10,825
northport
|
This could go either way but I'd say that freedom of religion and the right to refuse service will trump this type of said discrimination
When I need expert advice I tend to talk to myself The older I get the better I used to be
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: DEADorALIVE]
#2318979
12/05/17 05:13 AM
12/05/17 05:13 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 21,456 HSV AL
jmudler
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 21,456
HSV AL
|
Afraid the baker's going to lose this one... Yep.
Isaiah 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: timbercruiser]
#2319026
12/05/17 05:57 AM
12/05/17 05:57 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 36,675 alabama
BhamFred
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 36,675
alabama
|
Them queers can go to Wal Mart and get a box of Betty Crocker and make their own damn cake. this^^^ and then shove it where the sun don't shine.
I've spent most of the money I've made in my lifetime on hunting and fishing. The rest I just wasted.....
proud Cracker-Americaan
muslims are like coyotes, only good one is a dead one
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Wiley Coyote]
#2319113
12/05/17 06:52 AM
12/05/17 06:52 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 33,437 Your mom’s house
doekiller
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 33,437
Your mom’s house
|
They will not be issuing a ruling on the cake case today. They are just hearing arguments. The opinion will come out in the spring.
I really don't have any idea how they will rule in this case. Homosexuality is not a protected class under federal law, but it is under Colorado law apparently. The question I think they have to decide is if they want a ruling that could open the door for being gay to be a protected class nationwide. If they decide there is a legitimate state interest in protecting the rights of homosexuals, then I think they rule against the baker. Essentially putting homosexuals on the same level as all other protected classes (Age, sex, race, religion). If they do that, it trumps the bakers rights, just like it would a restaurant owner who said his religion didn't allow him to serve blacks.
On the other hand, if they determine there is no legitimate state interest in protecting homosexuals, then they rule for the bakers.
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: BhamFred]
#2319145
12/05/17 07:17 AM
12/05/17 07:17 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 15,547 Panhandle Florida
PaschalBD
Used to be TiderBD
|
Used to be TiderBD
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 15,547
Panhandle Florida
|
Them queers can go to Wal Mart and get a box of Betty Crocker and make their own damn cake. this^^^ and then shove it where the sun don't shine. I bet they've already tried it.... ![sick sick](/forum/images/graemlins/default/sick.gif)
A servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.
USAF Veteran
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: oldandwise]
#2319242
12/05/17 08:59 AM
12/05/17 08:59 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,363 Montgomery
WmHunter
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,363
Montgomery
|
The relevant immigration statute expressly gives the POTUS power to do what Trump did. The atheist Marxist liberal federal judges refused to apply that statute and should be impeached. Two SCOTUS members (Ginsburg and Sotomayer) also did not want to obey the statute.
"The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
" Chuck Sykes is a dictator control freak like Vladimir Putin " WmHunter
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: oldandwise]
#2319269
12/05/17 09:19 AM
12/05/17 09:19 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 36,675 alabama
BhamFred
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 36,675
alabama
|
too old and set in my ways to be nice to queers pushing their lifestyle on the rest of the world. Struck dead by lightening would be appropriate.
I've spent most of the money I've made in my lifetime on hunting and fishing. The rest I just wasted.....
proud Cracker-Americaan
muslims are like coyotes, only good one is a dead one
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: Clem]
#2319485
12/05/17 11:55 AM
12/05/17 11:55 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,186 Chelsea, AL
straycat
Old Mossy Horns
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,186
Chelsea, AL
|
Unsure if SCOTUS will rule on that tomorrow.
Definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out. I'll bet they side with the couple, citing that it would be discriminatory to decline service because of their sexual orientation.
Up until recently, sexual orientation/preference was NOT even remotely a protected class, as is race, age, religion, sex (actual gender), ethnicity, disability, etc. It was deemed a behavior not a protected right/class. But with the Progressive Movement push and designed court cases once Obama loaded the lower courts with over 280 Progressive judges the whole LGBTQ??? orientation/preference issue is front and center. The Progressive goal is to get the official status that sexual behavior/orientation/preference/identity is a protect class by arguing that being gay or trans or gender fluid is some natural thing. This situation/confrontation was hand picked to go to court, the media and eventually the SCOTUS to get such a ruling...pushing the envelope. Targeted and by design to do two things----put a huge dent into Christian freedom of religion and to promote a new class of protected people.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever." Isaiah 40:8
"Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.� Samuel Adams
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: doekiller]
#2319496
12/05/17 12:08 PM
12/05/17 12:08 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,186 Chelsea, AL
straycat
Old Mossy Horns
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,186
Chelsea, AL
|
They will not be issuing a ruling on the cake case today. They are just hearing arguments. The opinion will come out in the spring.
I really don't have any idea how they will rule in this case. Homosexuality is not a protected class under federal law, but it is under Colorado law apparently. The question I think they have to decide is if they want a ruling that could open the door for being gay to be a protected class nationwide. If they decide there is a legitimate state interest in protecting the rights of homosexuals, then I think they rule against the baker. Essentially putting homosexuals on the same level as all other protected classes (Age, sex, race, religion). If they do that, it trumps the bakers rights, just like it would a restaurant owner who said his religion didn't allow him to serve blacks.
On the other hand, if they determine there is no legitimate state interest in protecting homosexuals, then they rule for the bakers. Good analysis. It begs the question to what special or unique state interests there are to "protect" homosexuals over the laws that are already on the books that protect everyone else. These people are already part of at least 7 protected classes already, as we all are: 1. Age: all of us are a certain age, regardless of any other factor. 2. Color: all of us have a certain skin color, regardless of any other factor. 3. Race/Ethnicity: all of us have a certain race or ethnicity, regardless of any other factor. 4. Sex: all of us have a certain physical sex or gender, regardless of any other factor. 5. National Origin/Ancestry: all of us have a certain heritage/linage/origin, regardless of any other factor. 6. Genetic Information: all of us have a certain genetic code/info, regardless of any other factor. 7. Citizenship: all of us have a certain citizenship status, regardless of any other factor. The gay people filing suit are already protected by default on all of these already, plus more depending on their unique circumstance (religion, creed, veteran status, disabilities). They were not denied their specific gay cake based on any of these. So what compelling interest would there be?--other than to promote the Progressive LGBT? agenda to make all sexual and gender identity preferences a protected class?? And does that desire trump the rights of religion and expression that the baker does have protection for? This is what this case is about 100%. A conservative constitutional ruling would be the right ruling in this case, but there are some leaners on the court so I'm not so sure how it will go down. This is one of the biggest rulings to go before the court in a long time and will have devastating consequences down the road to the fabric of traditional America is the court rules in favor of the gay couple.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever." Isaiah 40:8
"Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.� Samuel Adams
|
|
|
Re: SCOTUS sides with Trump on travel ban in it's entirety
[Re: straycat]
#2319497
12/05/17 12:09 PM
12/05/17 12:09 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 26,466 Fayetteville TN Via Selma
jawbone
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 26,466
Fayetteville TN Via Selma
|
Up until recently, sexual orientation/preference was NOT even remotely a protected class, as is race, age, religion, sex (actual gender), ethnicity, disability, etc. It was deemed a behavior not a protected right/class.
It is a protected class in many states, as I pointed out earlier. That almost makes this a States Rights issue since the baker was following his religious beliefs. Does a state have the right to limit religious beliefs if they conflict with their state laws?
Lord, please help us get our nation straightened out.
|
|
|
|