Posted on 12/08/2013 5:59:59 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
“.” I’m fighting battles at a plane you can’t even bring yourself to imagine”
If that were true, you would know who your enemies are.
You don’t. you just lash out at anyone who does not agree with you.
That’s not they way you chose a battle. You don’t have clue.
That’s exactly what I have been trying to explain to you, but you can’t understand it..Your pride in your dogma over rides your ability to think rationally, to know who and what your enemies are and I can tell you that I am not one of them. I can’t have a conversation with you as I am only responding to your prolific insults.
Have a nice day...and God help you...You will need it.
RedNeck is too stupid to grasp your superior intellect too? I guess that means he’s no smarter than God.
turn the tables.
take over businesses which are intentionally catering to exclude normal people.
this is an administrative judge, lower than a mere magistrate.
This is a “denial of justice via poverty”. The admin judge is counting on the defendant not having money for an appeal. This admin judge should be removed.
Probably could be, but it would take an administration willing to do it. The law has made an exception for HMO's from those anti-trust laws. I'm not sure if insurance companies in general have been excepted.
One of the problems in trying to make sense of healthcare now, is that insurance companies are charged a dramatically different rate, medicare is charged yet another rate, and people without insurance pay through the nose, unless they negotiate up front.
I never said it worked but you have to admit, the ad tagline ...lose weight with AIDS (AYDS) was a) a pretty good prediction and b) the absolute worse tagline in history once AIDS went mainstream.
I think they wanted to call it GRID but the G in the name scared the G people because they didn’t want it to be associated with Gays and neither do I since the only homosexuals I’ve ever met were extremely messed up in the head and not just in their sexual proclivities. They certainly were NOT gay in any sense of the word. In a way, I can sympathize them wanting to re-frame the debate by using happy words but, for me, homosexual is my word of choice and if someone objects, then what would they call it? Is homosexual the incorrect term or do you not want to be reminded (and everyone else, too) what the word ‘GAY’ really means in their twisted context.
We need to take back that and other words. Whenever a documentary mentions the NSDAP (NAZI) party, it’s always, the right wing Nazi party... They refer to socialists and communists (is there a difference) as ‘The a small puppy for everyone and peace loving Socialists party’.
Reminds me of 1984.
The chocolate ration will be increased from 25 grams per week to 20 grams a week (everyone cheer).
bump
Then the sodomites win. What are you thinking?
Are you sure that isn't normal wedding night prep in this case?
No, the judge ruled correctly. The problem is the law itself.
As you noted, this judge is very junior and we don’t want individual activist judges ignoring laws they don’t like. His job was to ensure the law was being applied as written by the legislature, which is exactly what he did. He has to apply bad laws with the good.
The only judicial body with the authority to invalidate state laws is the Colorado Supreme Court, which is exactly where the defendants should be looking today.
“Being under God never, ever was the responsibility of Caesar.
It pains me to bring this obvious thing to light.
We had a system where we could be under God and then control Caesar. The envy of the world.
And we went for the bread and the circuses and went la-di-dah about the levers, only one (not not even the most influential) of which is the general election.”
The whole story sounds like a setup to bring suit. There’s an extensive GLBT network and they all do business with each other. Surely within those networks there is a baker who would just love to have baked this couple’s ‘wedding cake.’
no because there are other superceeding laws and there is precident.
This judge is still making law to favor a BEHAVIOR.
This is no different than a divorce law firm that caters only to men or women. There judges can not force a customer upon the business.
The judge is not “making law”. He’s interpreting Colorado state law to make sure it is being applied as written. Which it is.
It’s not his job to change the law. That belongs to the Colorado Supreme Court, the legislature or the voters to hold them accountable.
We don’t need our own activist judges.
pre-emption is real.
also, it is no different than a feel-good law being passed despite other laws to the contrary. state feel good laws passed despite federal law to the contrary. Judges are there to stop that nonsense and penalize the local politicians who pull that junk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.