Re: Judge Barrett
BeamMeUpScotty <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.christian.religion,alt.christnet.christianlife,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.atheism,alt.buddhism,alt.religion.taoism,alt.current-affairs.muslim,alt.religion.jewish |
|---|---|
| Organization | Forte - www.forteinc.com |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 10/1/20 9:40 AM, Siri Cruise wrote: > In article > <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> It seems pretty clear to me. You may not like Barrett's religion, but it >>> is not a valid reason to not give her the job. >> >> If the wording is that clear, then there would be no dissent ever over any >> cases presented to the Justices. All would be always in total agreement in >> their decision with each and every > > How many cases on this clause have the supremes heard? > This is why I said gays are a religion, they have no science to prove they aren't heterosexual so the court must have declared them a religion or a mental illness without actually realizing it. Having declared the GAYS to have RIGHTS that or different from "more than any other non gay person's RIGHTS" and that they are different from a "PERSON" so they needed special mention of their difference indicates they are being given status as having RIGHTS secured under other Amendment than the 14th Amendment. That would define them as a religion since there is no science to define them as a different type of human life that would be something other than a person. Their being gay is all in "their" mind the same as being a Christian or a Muslim is all in their minds... which means that the SUPREME COURT didn't define gays as having equal rights under the 14th Amendment (they were always equal as persons) it was under the 1st Amendment where they get RIGHTS specific to what they believe in their own mind. Gay isn't sexual or physical Gender.... it's mental and it's a belief by the person that they are something they call gay. And for the Supreme court to recognize it they couldn't call it a new SEXUAL OR GENDER IDENTITY, because it's a personal belief of the person who joins the cult/Religion of gays. And what they believe is NOT an outward scientific fact so while they are protected by the Constitution and have a RIGHT to believe in their religion.... do they have a RIGHT to force it on me through the courts? -- That's Karma *Mama'says* 222 - When Muslims want to run away from a Muslim country, does that mean they're Islamophobic?