Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on!

Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Real0ne -> Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/11/2017 6:20:39 PM)
Fuck you and your religious rights! We can hear the case to trample your religion, stomp on your rights to ban your loser asses and force to step in line with the state religion but you want the matter reconsidered well then fuck you! In December 2013, the Browns won a surprising legal victory when a federal court ruled that Utah's law against bigamy was unconstitutional. But an appeals court overturned that judgment in 2016. The Supreme Court in Washington declined to add the case to its schedule Monday, without giving any reason for its decision, thereby leaving the appeal court's decision in place. https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-supreme-court-declines-hear-polygamy-case-014925017.html?ref=gs

Termyn8or -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/11/2017 7:53:20 PM)
Bullshit like that is completely irrelevant to this country's real problems. Like Gay marriage, go ahead and then you can help support the divorce lawyers. We are getting low on money. Like, I want to divorce TWO broads ? Are you fucking kidding me ? T^T

WickedsDesire -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/11/2017 9:47:12 PM)
Trump, being of impeccable character and pussy grabbing claw, pleaded the 5th 97 (the creature has no shame you see, but 97 ffs!) times during his last divorce. Actually what did his last wife get from the settlement - a dull shilling most likely. Talking of a dull shilling morning real0ne The Supreme Court in Washington declined to add the case to its schedule Monday Perhaps there just keeping their schedules clear in case you know who goes fuking bonkers on the tweets and with his dullard orange crayon of screetch. Now this ~~adultery business~~ I mean bigmany, or is it polgamy, origami? Why is it illegal - must be some reason for that. Now, shagging a bint on the side is not illegal, and, well trumps last divorce where he was going for triple digits on the 5th so as not admit to adultery isnt illegal. So, why cant they just plead the 5th. That aside i need a couple of strumpets for a threesome, unless that too is also illegal? i thought poly was all the rage on these places anyway - well as long as you dont tell their number one, or family or something.

LadyDemura -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 1:54:58 AM)
I'm still not understanding why the government needs to be involved in a religious matter such as marriage at all. Why are any and all participants of such marriage treated differently than platonic roommates? It is a waste of the court system's time and resources to be involved in such petty arguments such as divorces...

Termyn8or -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 5:26:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire Trump, being of impeccable character and pussy grabbing claw, pleaded the 5th 97 (the creature has no shame you see, but 97 ffs!) times during his last divorce. Actually what did his last wife get from the settlement - a dull shilling most likely. Talking of a dull shilling morning real0ne The Supreme Court in Washington declined to add the case to its schedule Monday Perhaps there just keeping their schedules clear in case you know who goes fuking bonkers on the tweets and with his dullard orange crayon of screetch. Now this ~~adultery business~~ I mean bigmany, or is it polgamy, origami? Why is it illegal - must be some reason for that. Now, shagging a bint on the side is not illegal, and, well trumps last divorce where he was going for triple digits on the 5th so as not admit to adultery isnt illegal. So, why cant they just plead the 5th. That aside i need a couple of strumpets for a threesome, unless that too is also illegal? i thought poly was all the rage on these places anyway - well as long as you dont tell their number one, or family or something. You should watch Dr. Who instead of whatever junk soap operas you are now. T^T

WhoreMods -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 5:28:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyDemura I'm still not understanding why the government needs to be involved in a religious matter such as marriage at all. It doesn't need to be, obviously. Sadly, they enjoy poking around in other people's middens as a way of masking the stench of their own. Parts of the American electorate are so stupid that it works most of the time as well.

Termyn8or -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 5:46:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyDemura I'm still not understanding why the government needs to be involved in a religious matter such as marriage at all. Why are any and all participants of such marriage treated differently than platonic roommates? It is a waste of the court system's time and resources to be involved in such petty arguments such as divorces... Though astute, your question ignores a few things that are apparently important to those people. (concerned) You can jump the broom with anyone, you don't even need a pastor or the captain of a ship, once the vows are spoken in front of witnesses it is pretty much done. However not in the eyes of the law. Marriage licenses were probably introduced to combat polygamy. But then I know people who never got married who are more married than those who are. Loyal and monogamous, which used to be the definition. however, if you are Gay and get a life partner, jumping the broom does not get you into yout Husband's retirement. Really, almost every other aspect of a relationship can be taken care of via a durable will and power of attorney. Just not that pension, or actually health insurance. Actually to be fair, people should just be able to name anyone for their insurance, but not on a whim. An insurance compamy will cover a Wife with a difficult birth, and cover the kids, Gays have a whole different set of things to worry about. The insurance companies should actually be happy because they know they will not have to insure kids, many of which need some care. All of this shit is expensive. The crux of the matter really is legal status. A Wife can get her Husband's SS for life if she outlives him. I know one person who actually objects to that, and I am sure there are others but that is neither here nor there. she gets it. In a Gay marriage, nope. So now they have to get married in a state that recognizes it, and then hope they also recognize it later when one of them dies. I am not in favor of a centralized government so much. I believe that laws should fit the area, like we live right near a big lake, we do not need water saving toilets and showerheads. the stupidest ones are on the kitchen sink, if you are going to wash dishes you fill that thing up as far as you want, and all the water saver does is to make it take longer. just like the showerhead, I have to stand under it twice as long to get my fucking hair wet. That is NOT saving water. Now in Arizona they need to save water, it costs alot. but some things should be standardized. Like a diploa, they should shut the whole education department of the federal government down period, but they still have to set some standards as to who is learned enough to have a diploma. Otherwise industry will not move back in. Companies got real tired over the years of having to teach their HS grad employees how to fucking read. right now, industry would not move back here if people worked for free. Anyway, the basic answer is that it is not religion, it is all about money. It is about a guy's boyfriend being able to get on his SS and get a check, or on his health insurance, and due to the ACA be covered for pregnancy... It always comes back to money. T^T

WickedsDesire -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 6:06:51 AM)
term...I knows its a pack of Americashire jackals. a soviet-pact of ~~Republicans~~ dunderheads, but would it be a flock of daleks? That aside I only watch the road runner and muffin porn...not that I have a clue what you are on about thicko.

MrRodgers -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 9:11:45 AM)
Yea, RealOne, it's a bitch alright. Can't tell you how many times those laws got in my way. And if you believe that...then.....? But all I see happening in the US, if the courts allowed bigamy, would be a boon for divorce attorneys. I've actually fantasized say after the death of a husband with 2 or more wives...the fight, the lawyers etc. etc. It would soon very likely...get very ugly. Now if it were me that was the dying husband, well then.....?

WhoreMods -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 9:17:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers But all I see happening in the US, if the courts allowed bigamy, would be a boon for divorce attorneys. I've actually fantasized say after the death of a husband with 2 or more wives...the fight, the lawyers etc. etc. It would soon very likely...get very ugly. Now if it were me that was the dying husband, well then.....? You're hoping they could settle the matter with some mud wrestling? (I'm not sure that divorces would be an issue as the polygamists with a taste for Joseph Smith seem to be opposed to that one anyway. Isn't a woman who wants a divorce from a mormon pretty much begging to be excommunicated?)

vincentML -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 10:06:21 AM)
~FR~ Utah tried to gain statehood during a period of nearly 50 years but the rest of the nation looked upon polygamy as near to slavery. Finally, in the late 19th C the US Congress passed an Enabling Act requiring Utah to ban plural marriages as a condition for statehood. That may be why the Court would not take it up, IDK. I understand the libertarian point of view but there is a concern regarding the exploitation of young girls such as was charged not too long ago when Warren Jeffs was found guilty of sexual assault in Texas. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of British Columbia rendered a ruling in 2011: B.C. Supreme Court has upheld Canada's polygamy laws, but says minors who end up in polygamous marriages should be exempt from prosecution. In a 335-page decision released on Wednesday, Chief Justice Robert Bauman ruled in favour of the section of the Criminal Code outlawing polygamous unions. In his ruling, Bauman said while the law does infringe on religious freedom, it is justified given the harm polygamy causes to children, women and society. SOURCE

MrRodgers -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 11:24:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers But all I see happening in the US, if the courts allowed bigamy, would be a boon for divorce attorneys. I've actually fantasized say after the death of a husband with 2 or more wives...the fight, the lawyers etc. etc. It would soon very likely...get very ugly. Now if it were me that was the dying husband, well then.....? You're hoping they could settle the matter with some mud wrestling? (I'm not sure that divorces would be an issue as the polygamists with a taste for Joseph Smith seem to be opposed to that one anyway. Isn't a woman who wants a divorce from a mormon pretty much begging to be excommunicated?) Well you would be correct but I was leaving religion (any and any church) out of it and just being a little facetious. But if one uses their imagination, for every divorce of a 'legal' bigamist, there is likely 2 or 3 divorce attorneys involved. Like some men say now "I can't get divorced...I can't afford it.'

WhoreMods -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 11:42:02 AM)
My bad.

MrRodgers -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 8:49:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods My bad. But mud wrestling did conjured up quite a vision but also probably as accurate as any allegory about divorce attorneys.

Real0ne -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 11:13:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML ~FR~ Utah tried to gain statehood during a period of nearly 50 years but the rest of the nation looked upon polygamy as near to slavery. Finally, in the late 19th C the US Congress passed an Enabling Act requiring Utah to ban plural marriages as a condition for statehood. That may be why the Court would not take it up, IDK. I understand the libertarian point of view but there is a concern regarding the exploitation of young girls such as was charged not too long ago when Warren Jeffs was found guilty of sexual assault in Texas. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of British Columbia rendered a ruling in 2011: B.C. Supreme Court has upheld Canada's polygamy laws, but says minors who end up in polygamous marriages should be exempt from prosecution. In a 335-page decision released on Wednesday, Chief Justice Robert Bauman ruled in favour of the section of the Criminal Code outlawing polygamous unions. In his ruling, Bauman said while the law does infringe on religious freedom, it is justified given the harm polygamy causes to children, women and society. SOURCE good post Vince! here you have a supreme court judge sworn to uphold the law in your face telling you fuck the law, he is going to set precedence and trample your rights. If there was ever a reason to hang someone for treason there you have it. Its their duty to uphold the public trust, not legislate from the bench or uphold illegal legislation.

Real0ne -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 11:31:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyDemura I'm still not understanding why the government needs to be involved in a religious matter such as marriage at all. Why are any and all participants of such marriage treated differently than platonic roommates? It is a waste of the court system's time and resources to be involved in such petty arguments such as divorces... The gubblemint wants control over everything 'period'. Keep in mind this country in part came into existence due to religious persecution as a result of the kings divine prerogative. There is no religion that condemns polygamy, the closest is the catholics who do not condemn it but neither do they acknowledge it as a catholic condition. Marriage is a private contract and there is no need for the gub to be involved on any level. The gub will disagree and claim the have some bullshti 'compelling reason' that will sound good on paper but has no real substance that rises to the level of necessity to force people into a license. Keep in mind the legal reason for a license is a PRIVILEGE permit for what would 'otherwise' be illegal. They are used for taxation now days. You have to have a permit to put a fence around your yard in most american cities. Revenue. What the courts do is fraudulently control the law of a country with flim flam between narrow and broad rulings, use of what they determine is reasonable which in the final analysis anything can be adjudged 'reasonable', also summary judgment which denies you the right to have your case heard by a jury even if you demand it, and like the judge in vinces case simply trample on the charter. Who the hell can stop them short of a revolution? That right no one. It boiling the frog, it never knows its being cooked. Our law is being destroyed from within.

Real0ne -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 11:49:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Bullshit like that is completely irrelevant to this country's real problems. Like Gay marriage, go ahead and then you can help support the divorce lawyers. We are getting low on money. Like, I want to divorce TWO broads ? Are you fucking kidding me ? T^T Of all people on this board I am surprised that you do not recognise the ramifications at hand here. You have 2 choices. 1) state 2) your religion. If you lose 'your' religious rights you are left with only one religion and that is the NNFYMW religion of the state. No-Name-Fuck-You-My-Way You will have no choice but the states choice. Instead of atheists being idjits and ranting about all religion they should be fighting to be acknowledged as a religion. The state has over the years hijacked religion. Murder began as a religious no no and now its secular law. Now that that is a problem in and of itself, however any law that is made has to be unversal which is to say desireable by every religion to be legitimate. Well in the case vince cited the reasons are lots of harm, well fuck me silly, lets ban all marriage because of all the harm cause from divorces up the road and incest and so forth and on and fucking on. They solved no problem and just because they can site a problem does not mean it rises to the LEGITIMATE level of trampling peoples rights just because they dont like what they see, and hence choose their NNFYMW to force you into their state church. Its not about poly as such its about your ability to choose for yourself without state interference, the very thing that caused the revolution, and history repeats. The moral of this story they have no jurisdiction to interfere, trespass or violate anyones religious rights per the 1st period, and likewise in canada. Clearly and without any doubt what so ever poly is part of the mormon religion and a religious right, fuck they dont even have the qualifications nor jurisdiction to determine if its religious, that is privy to the elders or high priests of the religion in the case of a formal religion like the mormons, not to mention you have your personal religion.

tamaka -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/12/2017 11:54:55 PM)
Polygamy would complicate things like social security. If the husband dies, do all of the widows get to collect?

Real0ne -> RE: Read my lips: FUCK YOU and the religion you rode in on! (2/13/2017 12:01:03 AM)
I hear you, however it does not rise to the level of trampling on peoples rights. When something is reserved its out of bounds. Speech, religion, arms, press are all out of bounds. If you contract with your slave and agree your slave has the right to 'masturbate', that is a reserved right, and you have absolutely no legitimate jurisdiction to infringe on that right amd to do so is breaching the contract. What does that tell you about the state of the constitution and our legal system? Our rights are not determined by cost. They are what the agreement says, if it costs an extra penny too fucking bad, if it crowds the courts too fucking bad build more. The right to religion is a reserved right and its not 'under' the constitution therefore not under their jurisdiction, anything 'under' the constitution is a privilege which grants a privilige which is technicallyu constructed as a claim of 'privileged' right under the laws of the state or united states. Two completely different 'types' of rights. We can spend trillions chasing brown people around to steal their oil but cant build an extra fucking court house The american indians kicked the feds ass btw on in one case challenging their reserved rights and that case is worded so fucking carefully so it does not go viral because it applies the same way here.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875