Duck Dynasty Plucked

BigNBushy said:
If Obama care is a tax, and religious organizations are tax exempt, then why do they have to pay into it at all?

On the other hand, I'm not on the side of the religious institutions here. The most private relationship one can have is with their doctor. The church, although opposed to contraception, has no business interfering with whatever medical assistance it's employees seek. No employer does.
Click to expand...

employers are not religious organizations, they are employers.
 
tokeprep said:
Is your definition of "exercise" been adopted by the courts of the United States? If not, you have no point. If you believe in the constitution, you are bound by the court cases, not by your dictionary definitions and personal interpretations of words.
Click to expand...
If you believe in the constitution, you are bound by the constitution, not case precedence.
It's the judges that will intemperate the meaning of exercise, I'll find it hard to believe another definition.
 
BigNBushy said:
If Obama care is a tax, and religious organizations are tax exempt, then why do they have to pay into it at all?

On the other hand, I'm not on the side of the religious institutions here. The most private relationship one can have is with their doctor. The church, although opposed to contraception, has no business interfering with whatever medical assistance it's employees seek. No employer does.
Click to expand...

Religious organizations are presently exempt from federal income taxes. That doesn't mean they're exempt from all taxes.
 
beenthere said:
If you believe in the constitution, you are bound by the constitution, not case precedence.
It's the judges that will intemperate the meaning of exercise, I'll find it hard to believe another definition.
Click to expand...

Is your definition from a dictionary or papers written in the 1700s? If not, your definition is irrelevant. Justice Scalia will gleefully tell you that.

If you don't believe in precedent, it means you don't believe in the constitution. So make up your mind, do you believe in the constitution or not? You don't get to throw the courts out because you don't agree with what they've decided.
 
BigNBushy said:
If Obama care is a tax, and religious organizations are tax exempt, then why do they have to pay into it at all?

On the other hand, I'm not on the side of the religious institutions here. The most private relationship one can have is with their doctor. The church, although opposed to contraception, has no business interfering with whatever medical assistance it's employees seek. No employer does.
Click to expand...

Just because the church doesn't want to pay for birth control or abortion, doesn't imply the church is interfering.
 
What is funny about the separation of church and state is that the constitution is pretty clear the government should stay the hell out of it.

And in attempting to stay the hell out of it the government has created all sorts of legislation controlling the very thing they should have stayed the hell out of.

When you are in a room full of legislators, legislation is going to be the only solution...
 
NLXSK1 said:
What is funny about the separation of church and state is that the constitution is pretty clear the government should stay the hell out of it.

And in attempting to stay the hell out of it the government has created all sorts of legislation controlling the very thing they should have stayed the hell out of.

When you are in a room full of legislators, legislation is going to be the only solution...
Click to expand...

Again, you're ignoring the early history of the United States when you make that kind of statement. You're telling us that the same people who wrote our constitution had no idea what it said, which is obviously fallacious.
 
tokeprep said:
Is your definition from a dictionary or papers written in the 1700s? If not, your definition is irrelevant. Justice Scalia will gleefully tell you that.

If you don't believe in precedent, it means you don't believe in the constitution. So make up your mind, do you believe in the constitution or not? You don't get to throw the courts out because you don't agree with what they've decided.
Click to expand...

I never said I didn't believe in court precedent, I said if you believe in the constitution, you are bound by the constitution.
Your argument that if you do not believe in precedents, you don't believe in the constitution, is hogwash.
Were there precedents before the constitution?
 
its tv, therefore just like paula deen got kicked off for calling black people the n word, he will get kicked off for telling people their going to hell for being gay,
he choose to stand up for what he believes in and now hes gotta sleep in the bed he made.

thats all it is.

While i dont apericate his comments nor apericate what that entire family offers, hes allowed to say what he wants that being said as someone on the other end of the stick i dont apericate him telling me my mom going to hell

"thou shall not kill"

oh guess their entire family is going to hell cause they hunt animals.
 
beenthere said:
I never said I didn't believe in court precedent, I said if you believe in the constitution, you are bound by the constitution.
Your argument that if you do not believe in precedents, you don't believe in the constitution, is hogwash.
Were there precedents before the constitution?
Click to expand...

When there are two possible interpretations of the constitution, the parties argue out their differences in the courts of the United States. The courts decide. Their precedents are binding on all of us. The text is not as black and white as you'd like to make it; the people who wrote the constitution did not necessarily agree on what it meant.
 
sunni said:
its tv, therefore just like paula deen got kicked off for calling black people the n word, he will get kicked off for telling people their going to hell for being gay,
he choose to stand up for what he believes in and now hes gotta sleep in the bed he made.

thats all it is.

While i dont apericate his comments nor apericate what that entire family offers, hes allowed to say what he wants that being said as someone on the other end of the stick i dont apericate him telling me my mom going to hell

"thou shall not kill"

oh guess their entire family is going to hell cause they hunt animals.
Click to expand...

I must say that I found the comments about black people far more offensive than the comments about gay people. What Robertson said about black people is what every white Southerner said about the South in the pre-civil rights era: the blacks are content! they don't complain! all is well!

What bullshit. Every white Southerner in that era uttered exactly the same words in support of the status quo in the south. I'm shocked that the media isn't focusing on those comments as much as it is on the gay ones.
 
beenthere said:
If you believe in the constitution, you are bound by the constitution, not case precedence.
It's the judges that will intemperate the meaning of exercise, I'll find it hard to believe another definition.
Click to expand...

Speaking of definitions, could you please give me the definition of the word "intemperate"? I found this in Websters

[h=2]in·tem·per·ate[/h] adjective \-p(ə-)rət\ : having extreme conditions
: having or showing a lack of emotional calmness or control
: often drinking too much alcohol



Are you saying that our fine Judges are extreme nutcases who drink too much, or did I just misinterpret what you wrote?

mis·in·ter·pret
ˌmisinˈtərprət/
verb
verb: misinterpret; 3rd person present: misinterprets; past tense: misinterpreted; past participle: misinterpreted; gerund or present participle: misinterpreting
1.
interpret (something or someone) wrongly.
[TABLE="class: vk_tbl vk_gy"]
[TR]
[TD="class: lr_dct_nyms_ttl"]synonyms:[/TD]
[TD]misunderstand, misconceive, misconstrue, misapprehend, mistake, misread[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Just asking :fire:
 
CaretakerDad said:
Speaking of definitions, could you please give me the definition of the word "intemperate"? I found this in Websters

in·tem·per·ate

adjective \-p(ə-)rət\ : having extreme conditions
: having or showing a lack of emotional calmness or control
: often drinking too much alcohol



Are you saying that our fine Judges are extreme nutcases who drink too much, or did I just misinterpret what you wrote?

mis·in·ter·pret
ˌmisinˈtərprət/
verb
verb: misinterpret; 3rd person present: misinterprets; past tense: misinterpreted; past participle: misinterpreted; gerund or present participle: misinterpreting
1.
interpret (something or someone) wrongly.
[TABLE="class: vk_tbl vk_gy"]
[TR]
[TD="class: lr_dct_nyms_ttl"]synonyms:[/TD]
[TD]misunderstand, misconceive, misconstrue, misapprehend, mistake, misread[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Just asking :fire:
Click to expand...

I guess that's what I get with auto correct.
Just curious, if I was a leftie and agreed with your politics, would you even have bothered?
Never mind, I already know the answer.
 
UncleBuck said:
get some perspective, you crybaby.

speech is still free. that inbred hick is free to state his retarded, bible based beliefs, and A&E is free to air or not air his show at their discretion.

put your fucking head back on and stop crying.
Click to expand...


I just wanted to repeat this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top