Previous 21 - 30 Next
Awwww you poor dears from NAG (national assoication of gals). Let's place this in liberal terms. Remember how when libtards love a supreme court decision they always say it's "settled law". Well hobby lobby case is now "settled law". The supreme court has spoken. You lost.
Hey, that's ok. Have you ever noticed almost all of these really angry, child killer types aren't really very attractive and not generally someone you'd want to have sex with anyway. I mean have you looked at most of them?
It's not a right if someone else besides you has to pay for it. Health insurance through your company or oraganization is not a right, never has been. Companies only started offering insurance through the workplace because the new deal dimocratic socialists froze wages. So instead companies enticed workers by offering insurance as a benefit. And now these same bunch of dimocratic socialists are trying to say it's a right. And why is Patty Murray the spearhead on this issue. Have you ever noticed the women that are screaming the loudest about birth control and abortion are chicks you wouldn't want to do anyway? Bwahahaha
Bottom line, stupid dimocrats, is if it costs money it is NOT a right! If someone has to pay for it, it's not a right. It's that simple. Free speech- doesn't require someone to pay for it. Freedom of assembly- the same. Right to bear arms-same. Right to not incriminate yourself- same. Freedom of religion- same.
Ok liberal retards, take a breath. First of all, not one person was denied contraceptives. For one thing contraceptives are dirt damn cheap and calling them healthcare is rediculous. Contraceptives are the cheapest thing you can purchase that has anything remotely to do with insurance. Second, corporations thear aren't "closely held" can't deny contraceptives under this ruling. Of course, almost all libtards have no idea what "closely held" even means because well the average libtard is just plain stupid. Closely held means a company that's stock is owned by just a few people, like family members. When a family owns a business the business IS the same as the family. A family can have closely held religious beliefs. A large multi-national company with gazillions of share holders don't have closely held religious convictions. Another thing for libturds to consider is the fact that a company that doesn't pay for certain contraceptives because of religious views is not co-ercing someone into NOT getting contraceptives. However the government was trying to co-erce at the point of a gun a company to go against their religious convictions, clearly violating the first amendment. I know this is all too hard for libs to understand (the rank and file anyway). The leaders of their movement are just mad as hell because the court established boundaries. We all know that deep (and not so deep) inside every liberal is is murderous dictator dieing to get out. Willing to do any kind of evil to make people go what they want. I was always taught in school that the proper thing to happen when a supposed right or perrogative of government ran up against any one of the bill of rights was that the other right or the supposed perrogative stood down. Meaning once a government action hit the first 10 amendments they cease and desist or you no longer have a free society. I realize this explanation is wasted on brain dead libs.
Wrong! The supreme court ruled this law was unconstitutional because it carved out a special case for abortion. Treating abortion clinics differently. Under the law that the court struck down it was ok to protest the recruitment center, the VA etc. but NOT abortion clinics. The point being the people passing the law conferred special rights to abortion clinics. Now the people that passed the law could, I suppose pass a law that made a protest area for all public places. But I'll doubt they will. This legislature is liberal or democratic I'm guessing, so they probably don't care about free speech or protecting anyone except abortion clinics. I know for a fact libtards don't mind busing in tons of union thugs to picket people's actual houses, so get your story right.
grab not drab lol
Damn, two good unanimous rulings in a row by the supremes. One of the points in the lawsuit was that the NLRB rulings with recess appointee were invalid. That would be interesting and so cool! One more odummy power drab bites the dust. Have you libs ever noticed what a coward he is against our enemies and how much he loves to bully us? Just wondered if you ever noticed.
In response to:

No Denying Climate Change Deniers

John W11 Wrote: Jun 26, 2014 11:29 AM
Yeah, I looked at the list of "peer reviews". It's funny they all have skin in the game. Always follow the money my friend. These "peer reviews" are all like asking AG Holder to investigate the WH. If we spent as much money REAL alternate energy research as we do global warming we would probably already have nuclear fusion, warp drives and just about every other scifi object we wanted. The truth is it's about the money. Actually some of the emails point to the fact that even with all the fudging going on, they numbers still don't add up to the warming that the models predict and in some cases even cooling. That was a major thrust of my argument also. So the suspects in the caper all getting together and saying "nothing to see here, we reviewed it" means nothing. See the truth of the matter is the "warming science" can't predict with any certainty if there is ACTUAL warming or to what degree with any of the accuracy that say you can predict the movement of objects on a trajectory- ballistics. Or even the laws of thermodynamics. To me, until it reaches that level, it's not "science". Still way more art than science.
Damn, the Supremes are on a roll today. Listening to all the liberal tweets and comments, it just strikes me as odd that libtards love abortion more than freedom of speech. IT's really amazing. These are the same folks that want taxpayers to support objectionable art like "pi$$ crucifix" in the name of free speech.
In response to:

No Denying Climate Change Deniers

John W11 Wrote: Jun 26, 2014 10:50 AM
Guess you never heard of the Great East Anglia number fudging caper huh? Several agencies have been found to adjust numbers purely to make the warming (if it was there to begin with) more severe. The emails have been exposed. It's a matter of record. So yes, the public has lost any faith in the "science of global warming". Too many lies and distortions have been uncovered. It's not the publics fault but the fault of charlatans who lied or fudged the numbers.
Previous 21 - 30 Next