2511
Comments (560)
sorted by:
393
conservativeyuppie 393 points ago +394 / -1

Please pray for Clarence Thomas to stay in good health and for all the other conservative justices too so this can happen in our lifetimes.

192
MarxhatedJews 192 points ago +192 / -0

The threats of violence didn't work. This decision is acceleration.

83
canttouchdis 83 points ago +92 / -9

is my thing. personally I don't give a fuck who you married and I don't think it's the government's business

but here's the other side of that. we've seen the bullshit they do when you give them an inch. they didn't take a mile. they took a light year

the reason I oppose gay marriage is because if we keep these pedophilic types fighting for basic bullshit like who they can marry and what they can do in their bedroom then they're not going to be fighting for their right to rape your kid and throw dollars at them at a child drag strip show..

a little impression is actually good because it keeps them from going overboard. they'll always be fighting for something small and then they won't be trying to fuck your kids..

77
dahdahdah_dahditdah 77 points ago +77 / -0

The thing that freaks me out is the zero tolerance the woke have for other views. If you oppose gay marriage just because you happen to believe the old way was better, you need to be fired from your job, denied the ability to buy things at a store, punched in the face in the street, and so on.

We should stop taking people seriously who behave like this. Or start taking them seriously in a different way. Anyway, you get what I'm saying.

44
Long_time_lurker 44 points ago +44 / -0

I put up a church flyer on a public bulletin board. At first they took them down, then someone ripped the bulletin board off the wall (leaving nails sticking out of it). So I taped the flyer to the wall.

It was in the trash nearby, ripped in half. Now they've put up "NO SOLITICTING" stickers. Tempted to tape a flyer on top of that :)

27
tom_machine 27 points ago +28 / -1

bUt MuH WeStBoRo BaPtIsT cHuRcH mEaNs AlL ChRiStIaNs ArE eViL

ThE CiA tOlD mE sO

14
basedboston 14 points ago +16 / -2

Westboro GLOWED

6
Pepe2016_ivotedfTD 6 points ago +7 / -1

This needs reminded.

4
MastaJoda 4 points ago +4 / -0

Knowing what we know now, there’s good evidence to support the theory at least. Nobody is that fucking radical. Only Alinsky worshipping commie cultists would go way beyond believable.

0
TurdFergusen 0 points ago +1 / -1

I love how everything is filled with glowies to some of you people

8
DieHeretic 8 points ago +8 / -0

And every single member is a democrat.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
12
canttouchdis 12 points ago +12 / -0

do it lol

bonus points for creative ways of making it hurt people who try to rip it down

like that guy who electrified his trump yard sign

6
Long_time_lurker 6 points ago +6 / -0

I should find something spicy about abortion to post there :D

Pretty sure it's the pencil-necked RBG simp who has a sticker of her on his car, but it could be others, hard to say.

7
DieHeretic 7 points ago +7 / -0

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Is Burning In Hell

That might get them to stroke out a bit.

4
canttouchdis 4 points ago +4 / -0

you should post a sign that says all women should be forced to have their tubes tied until they're ready to have a baby. that'll get them lmaoo

1
Goldlight 1 point ago +1 / -0

MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO CAMERAS

7
Jettylee 7 points ago +7 / -0

Why stop now?

6
Long_time_lurker 6 points ago +6 / -0

I don't have any more fliers right now and I'm still thinking about the best way to respond.

9
Jettylee 9 points ago +9 / -0

Your doing the Lord’s work!

6
TGNX 6 points ago +6 / -0

Have you considered a stencil and a spray can?

2
LonelyLadypedeSF_CA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Soliciting!

1
Goldlight 1 point ago +1 / -0

do it

23
try4gain 23 points ago +23 / -0

The Radical left is control freaks and has been for years.

wants to control

  • what you eat
  • what humor is ok
  • what kids learn
  • what cars are ok
  • what types of energy is ok
  • what opinions are ok

the left hasnt found anything they dont want to totally control

11
Kpstyles 11 points ago +11 / -0

I grew up around a lot of legalistic Christians and I have always felt more free to mess up around them than leftist friends. At least the judgy Christians forgive. Leftists want blood.

5
gassy_burrito_lover 5 points ago +5 / -0

This x1000 back when I was a liberal I would read comments and be thankful that I didn't know these people. They haven't anything to say when it's a kiddiddle, gross. If you're on their team they will excuse anything.

3
ClarenceBeeks 3 points ago +3 / -0

Good summary. Truth

4
canttouchdis 4 points ago +4 / -0

it's how u force ur views on ppl

punish dissent

we should learn from them

4
Voteordie 4 points ago +4 / -0

State/federal government shouldn’t give any incentive to get married, straight or gay. If the court takes up the gay marriage case I hope they clear all federal and state rules around marriage.

I don’t need the state nosing into my personal business.

1
JesusisKing 1 point ago +1 / -0

right? as if HALF the country didnt feel that way THIS LIFETIME

20
ubermk3 20 points ago +23 / -3

Gay marriage was always going to be more than just a personal decision. It affects all of society because it is an attempt to publicly honor an unnatural union. There are no same sex couples found among any other species of life on earth. Just like there are only two genders of every species on earth yet they try to claim humans can have more than two. It's a corrupt, intentional distortion of the truth with the goal of creating confusion, chaos and division to weaken and destroy us.

3
Voteordie 3 points ago +7 / -4

No other animals are building cars and rocket ships either, should we assume that constitutional legality begins and ends at what animals do? Also, animals do not have 2 genders, or any genders in fact, they have 2 sexes (or three in the case of intersex but they’re really just members of both) just like humans. Gender is a social construct, just like race. We should push to eliminate any use of gender as an explanatory term, it only sows division and it’s done on purpose by the left.

The government has no bunsiness in marriage, gay or straight. Eliminate the marriage incentives, it should be a religious agreement and should have zero state interference.

4
BadManOrange 4 points ago +4 / -0

The state has a stake in stable family units for the healthy growth of children and babies being born to provide the next generation of labor, continue the lineage, and growth of the nation. When your strip those things away the nation falls apart as we're seeing. So yes, from that perspective the state has an interest/stake in people getting married. Sadly, our current government is working against the long-term prosperity of our country.

2
gassy_burrito_lover 2 points ago +2 / -0

They are trying to do that. They want to collapse the state. They don't want responsibility for it.

1
Voteordie 1 point ago +3 / -2

Last I checked, the woman’s body didn’t check for a ring when you’re trying to get pregnant. Your argument completely falls apart when you begin to argue that the state should have any say how I go about running my family.

2
gassy_burrito_lover 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's bolshevism. They know that.

13
AnPrim 13 points ago +14 / -1

There is a more final solution

11
Jasonshaw1776 11 points ago +11 / -0

woodchippers go brrrrrrrtt

9
Jettylee 9 points ago +9 / -0

Guillotines are fun and gravity is free.

5
STONKATRUCK 5 points ago +5 / -0

And waste the gas? R u crazy?

5
Inquisitor_Corvus 5 points ago +5 / -0

Convert to wood gassifier. Satisfies one’s need to tinker and provides enjoyment for the whole family!

2
STONKATRUCK 2 points ago +2 / -0

I am familiar with wood gasification. You can build one

3
Dman82 3 points ago +3 / -0

Make pikes great again

4
STONKATRUCK 4 points ago +4 / -0

I would prefer this option

2
notCIA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Would electric woodchippers meet your fancy?

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
bratt 2 points ago +2 / -0

How about cordless wood chippers like axes and adze?

10
IWanttotalknow 10 points ago +12 / -2

You're talking about two groups on the same side of the political aisle who are not the same group.

Gay Agenda vs. Queer Agenda.

Queer Agenda is the slippery slope. They used LGB, added TQIA+ and use the LGB as a shield from criticism. Drag Queen Story Time, MAPs, etc? Queer Agenda. Almost every gay person I've talked to despises them.

What's the Queer Agenda up to now? Well, it has nothing to do with homosexuality (Queer basically means "anti-normal in every single regard possible). They're promoting incest and saying that banning incest is eugenics of retarded folx. No, I'm not making this up, they write papers about it, just like they wrote papers about Drag Queen Story Time.

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1540341441318338560?s=20&t=1GdPLhCgEzXZdh5_6RCcMw

9
canttouchdis 9 points ago +9 / -0

queer agenda wouldn't exist without gay marriage

4
IWanttotalknow 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yes, it would, and mostly they weren't aware it existed and most people didn't even understand it.

Queer Agenda existed completely separate of the Gay Agenda - it's a PARASITE on the Gay Agenda.

7
SonofAnu 7 points ago +7 / -0

canttouchdis is right, because gay marriage was allowed it opened the door to all these other things. I was a denier that thought anything other than people being able to get married wasn't going to happen, now look at what has unfurled. The only upside to the gays being allowed to marry is now I and many others see the truth and what the real agendas were.

5
IWanttotalknow 5 points ago +6 / -1

He is incorrect, it's a common error among the right. I could write a gigantic wall of text, but instead I'll give you the podcast version: https://youtu.be/TSgmxndjtu4 - it's worth your time if you find the subject interesting.

The tl;dr: Gay Agenda was genuinely arguing and going for gay marriage and no discrimination. There is validity here, though I quibble a bit with gay marriage. They were saying no slippery slope - and they meant it. Most of them were just as dumb and blind to the Queer Agenda as everyone else was. The concern was a slippery slope. While the Gay Agenda types were saying no, and meant it - the Queer Agenda people were like "Don't look at us over here, ignore us. We're just busy lubing up the slope, the wettest, most slippery lube we've got. Lubing that slope like no tomorrow. What?! You're looking at us? FUCK YOU YOU'RE A HOMOPHOBIC BIGOT"

The answer is quite simple: Split LGB from TQIA+. They aren't fucking related at all. And right now is PRIME time to do it. You've got "LGB" groups popping up and under fire from queer activists, from TQIA+ groups. But they're not the same thing at all. Queer = "anti-normal" and in ALL REGARDS. What you do is SNATCH away the LGB from the TQIA+. Are LGB people gonna be hardcore religious conservatives? Fuck no. But many of them hate the Queer Agenda and they see their rights being protected by the right.

And y'know what helps wonderfully in that separation? Conversion therapy. The Queer Agenda is transing the gay away. Talk about irreconcilable differences! That's what I call a C-C-Combo Breaker! lol.

6
kyblugrass 6 points ago +6 / -0

You've been the only person I've seen in a while to succinctly talk about this. The Gays have really backed themselves into a corner by not be loud enough about Queer agenda and publicly divorcing themselves from it. And as the pendulum of public opinion swings the other way they may not be able to totally avoid the fallout.

3
IWanttotalknow 3 points ago +3 / -0

Give @conceptualJames a follow on Twitter then, he talks about it better than I do lol.

But yeah. It's no bueno here, gays as opposed to queers have a huge power advantage right now that they don't normally have and should absolutely blast the Queer Agenda at every single opportunity. Put it this way: The Democrats doubling down endlessly has wrecked them - but the gays have have mostly gone along with the queers in their doubling down. It's only in the last few years that a large chunk of them stopped. And fair enough: you can be a typical gay dude and not paying attention like most people weren't, and woken up - but at the same time, they absolutely should've been "Hey, we're not going back to the days of every gay dude is a pedophile type shit, STOP IT." they had their own pressure to deal with their (i.e: CRT stuff got a lot of people to feel guilty over their skin color and wonder if they were racist, gays in regards to queers got "don't be a bigot now that you're accepted" and "don't pull up the ladder behind you" type stuff).

I'm just happy people are really noticing it more and more. It's an issue that's going to come to a head eventually, so seeing "LGB" groups is a healthy sign from where we are. Eventually it shouldn't be needed at all.

3
SonofAnu 3 points ago +3 / -0

Like the killer instinct ref, none of my past friends and acquaintances that were gay were more men then any Soyboy and they weren’t fond of gays that were overly flamboyant and would call them fags lol. None of them were from this current groomer class of queer. What you say from my past perspective makes sense. Also the Globalists are great at taking groups and using them as shields while they do their dirty work.

3
IWanttotalknow 3 points ago +3 / -0

There's a very good reason for that. Sorry it's a long podcast, but it'll make it clear for you if you're interested in the subject: https://youtu.be/TSgmxndjtu4

I'll try and tl;dr it: The Gay Agenda and the Queer Agenda are as separate as things can come. The Gay Agenda is a Civil Rights movement to not be discriminated against and get married. It is what it sounds like. The Queer Agenda is literally a gnostic anti-human cult - none of those words are used incorrectly or in a hyperbolic manner. It's accurate and correctly descriptive.

People can tell the difference, as the gay friends you mentioned could tell the difference. You know something is off and different, but most people don't have the history or ideology to describe it correctly or properly, so they opt for shorthand and stereotypes. The difference cannot be understated.

1
krzyzowiec 1 point ago +1 / -0

Marriage is a Christian union for the purpose of procreation. It never made sense for homosexuals to want it other than to mock God.

1
IWanttotalknow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Christians aren't the only people in the world who get married. Just as people didn't always use rings for marriage but now it's an entire industry. It represents something. I'm pretty sure gay people weren't like "We want to mock God. Let's get married, that'll show him!" - though, honestly, Queer people would. They fucking hate God, whether they believe he exists or is just an idea, they hate either way. 100$ Yuval Noah Harari fits into that.

3
notCIA 3 points ago +3 / -0

I say keep them in the dark. That's where they do best for themselves and society. You'll never get rid of it, but you can keep it controlled. Allow them to live their life but don't let them flaunt it ar get into children's heads.

2
Destineed369 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don’t want to control people. I just want them to leave me and children everywhere alone.

1
notCIA 1 point ago +2 / -1

Sadly, the choice isn't whether or not to leave them alone, I wish it were. The choice is control them or let them control you. You aren't gonna genocide them, but they're gonna give your kid a mental illness and make them off themselves before they're 30.

The choice is clear to me.

1
Wtf_socialismreally 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't know if you realize this, but that is a tyrannical slope and it is almost always how tyranny has started in our history.

It is often someone who is controlled or convinces other people they're controlled and wrests control for themselves on that basis alone.

Instead, bridges can be built, not burned. Just because they've burned bridges doesn't mean we can't build bridges on our way back to a more Constitutional way of life.

1
notCIA 1 point ago +1 / -0

You have to give up your fantasies at some point and deal in reality. Refusing to keep tyrants at bay is how you get tyranny, not fighting it off and stopping it at the roots.

5
Powhattan 5 points ago +5 / -0

Probably already decided. 😀 just not leaked yet.

4
Latin_Patriot_MAGA 4 points ago +4 / -0

faith in American justice restored again.

73
Just_wanted_darkmode 73 points ago +74 / -1

Man if same-sex marriage dies the entire gay agenda dies with it. That would be glorious.

41
KAGGIN 41 points ago +44 / -3

It must happen. They will continue to push their agenda down our throats if we don't.

23
GodEmperor2024 23 points ago +24 / -1

They are literally chemically castrating our children!

6
KAGGIN 6 points ago +7 / -1

Their own children

9
_Cabal_ 9 points ago +10 / -1

Incrementalism. Your children are next.

2
KAGGIN 2 points ago +4 / -2

They would become extinct real quick.

5
Monkeybeardontcare 5 points ago +5 / -0

one day the Dr Nurses and parents who do this will be held to account. Im amazed theyve gotten away with this much and no retaliation.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
3
Dessert_Eagle 3 points ago +3 / -0

If the gaylesbian community divorces from the demented gender make believe gang, then I would support samesex marriage 110%. If I were a prosecutor, that'd be a plea deal I'd make with them.

2
JesusisKing 2 points ago +2 / -0

i really dont know they justified so many killings and wars abroad through "democracy" (globohomo) that it may be too established from the ruling class to walk back without some destabilization.

We want Globohomo destabilized tho obviously

1
RedPillForceFeed 1 point ago +2 / -1

Hey, don't take away all the things that they love:
https://patriots.win/p/15HIhWzTCT/

29
IMMORTAN_TRUMP 29 points ago +30 / -1

It really should. There is no such thing as gay marriage. Marriage is about family formation. Gays can’t do that.

21
Walt_Kowalski 21 points ago +23 / -2

Marriage is a RELIGIOUS institution and the government should have nothing to do with it, period. The government should only recognize civil unions, the end. Muh "separation of church and state," right?

13
Some_Rando_Web_Dev 13 points ago +13 / -0

Once a country gives credence, an open forum, and celebrates degeneracy it never comes back (that has nothing to do with church and state). Fight against cultural homosexuality (while allowing them to live within their own homes as they will - without the right to rape kids, adopt kids, etc.), and take the country back. We might still have a chance. Continue the status quo and you lose your country in a few years anyways. Your choice

10
dahdahdah_dahditdah 10 points ago +11 / -1

Marriage is a human institution. It's religious in the sense that God invented it and gave it to humans. But you don't need a preacher to officiate a wedding between atheists - it's just as legitimate a marriage before God.

The state has an interest in marriage - in preventing siblings and other intrinsically biologically non mating pairs (including... yeah...) from marrying, and in generally promoting healthy, two parent, man + woman marriages and homes. The state is doing a bad job of this, obviously.

-1
Voteordie -1 points ago +1 / -2

Nope, the state should have zero interest in marriage, it’s bull shit and used to control people and force them to update the government on their lives on a yearly basis.

2
dahdahdah_dahditdah 2 points ago +2 / -0

Marriage isn’t BS, and if the government weren’t upholding (downholding?) a gutter level take on social and moral aspects of it they could actually do some good. But I grant you that govt involvement in marriage has been a disaster.

1
Voteordie 1 point ago +2 / -1

The state has no business intruding on a social and religious contract between two individuals. I don’t need some piece of paper from the state to tell me my wife and I are partners. If the state eliminated marriage rules gay marriage wouldn’t be an issue because they’d go back to living to their lives how they have since before the bill was introduced but the incentives (tax breaks, half the wealth, health care etc.) made it a desire.

6
Yaemz123 6 points ago +6 / -0

The government has a vested interest in promoting the standard family unit of a man and woman united in a marriage as a fundamental building block upon which our society rests. That's why so many governments throughout the world throughout history have recognized marriages in a legal sense.

1
Voteordie 1 point ago +2 / -1

The state has no business in marriage, slapping some bull shit “PrOtEcT tHe FaMIly UnIt” label on it is essentially okaying the government to come and tell me when I can and cannot have sex, when I can have a child or even tell me when I have to want to have sex and have a child. Your argument opens the door to a 1984 scenario; the state just wants to “protect” the family unit so you cannot have another kid because it might break up your current family unit and thus you cannot have sex.

Marriage should be an agreement between two people recognized by one’s close relatives and friends, the state should stay out of it.

2
Tendiesandkekchup 2 points ago +2 / -0

The only whole “small government”, “just leave me alone and stay out of my life” posturing becomes null and void around here when it’s controlling your life the way we want.

2
Voteordie 2 points ago +2 / -0

Sounds about right

1
thunderpussy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Indeed. And hypocrisy smells foul no matter what side it emanates from....

I'm not interested in the color of the boot on my neck, be it black, brown, red, rainbow, or white with a cross.

The problem is the boot on my neck...

14
Just_wanted_darkmode 14 points ago +14 / -0

They can adopt and groomer children, that's their idea of a family.

2
DieHeretic 2 points ago +2 / -0

Those adopted children are all in grave danger of being sexually molested and trafficked.

Mark my words, in less than ten years the horror stories those children will tell will be horrendous, and anyone who was in favor of letting gays adopt children will be responsible for all of it.

1
thunderpussy 1 point ago +1 / -0

You could fill volumes with the horror stories of adoptees PERIOD, no matter where they are placed, trust me.

1
DieHeretic 1 point ago +1 / -0

Different members of my family are involved in both the legal side and the social welfare aspects of child abuse, fostercare and adoption.

I have first-hand knowledge and experience of the horror stories.

5
GodEmperor2024 5 points ago +5 / -0

Exactly. The reason the government recognizes marriage in the first place is to help families giving children to the community, and making turn grow up in a stable environment.

7
minotaurbeach 7 points ago +7 / -0
  • well, they are dammed by choice, however, it is not fair to subject children to this kind of relationship.

There are straight couples that want a fetish life at home, wearing collars, and children should never be exposed to this- it is not just the parents, but the sex predators that life attracts. Often, they trust their friends babysit, and kids get raped and worse.

6
Shalomtoyou 6 points ago +6 / -0

Yeah, fine with me.

You want to get the freak on, go ahead. AFTER the kids are in bed.

4
Some_Rando_Web_Dev 4 points ago +4 / -0

None of these are good arguments to let perverts adopt. An outlier does not an argument make.

4
minotaurbeach 4 points ago +4 / -0

It seems like they are using marriage to gain access to legal adoption.

6
Some_Rando_Web_Dev 6 points ago +6 / -0

Which allows them to have access to a pool of an under-represented group of vulnerable children.. Ahem... Exactly what those evil Christians were telling you for a long time. They want to fuck kids.

3
minotaurbeach 3 points ago +3 / -0

Anyone adopting living adult lifestyles, should be disqualified from adoption. Children need a life that is as normal as possible, and If you have a child naturally, your lifestyle needs to become 'parenting'.

2
minotaurbeach 2 points ago +2 / -0

Children do not belong in that situation.

6
flashersenpai 6 points ago +6 / -0

It wouldn't die that'd be great for them.

What would actually throw tendies is ending government control of marriage altogether. Which is the right course of action.

3
Some_Rando_Web_Dev 3 points ago +3 / -0

For government to actually recognize a true union between one man and one woman is righteous, to recognize anything else is diabolical. There is no such union that is equal, no matter the humanity of the former union.

18
basshead 18 points ago +19 / -1

Hey now, Wetworks at the Vineyard is just a band name!

7
GEOTUSMAGA 7 points ago +7 / -0

Came here for a vineyard comment.

4
IMMORTAN_TRUMP 4 points ago +4 / -0

“We’re weighing a movie script about killing a judge! So what if the coordinates for the movie set happen to be Scalia’s ranch that he died on!”

5
mytummyhurts 5 points ago +5 / -0

May he live a thousand years!

1
JunkieBiden 1 point ago +1 / -0

He's the only real one. Best we got

127
XDingoX83 127 points ago +159 / -32

Libertarian here:

No government in marriage. Let religion decide who they marry. Marriage should be between two people not the government and two people. If the Catholic Church won’t marry you then that’s their right.

I don’t care you who you fuck just don’t tell me about it, contraceptive should no different than any other drug, legal. If you want to down a gallon of bleach do it. Just don’t force it on anyone else.

30
IrreducibleComplexit 30 points ago +76 / -46

That’s how we ended up with drag story hour. Have you not learned?!

57
Colonel_Chestbridge 57 points ago +74 / -17

Gay people have existed forever. Drag queen story hour is new. That happened because parents stopped giving a shit what happens to their children.

43
ThisTrainHasNoBrakes 43 points ago +50 / -7

It happened because of too much tolerance, at the fear of being called a “bigot”.

We need to be what they accuse us of, and do it proudly.

8
Colonel_Chestbridge 8 points ago +13 / -5

Being so “tolerant” that you’ll expose your children to that IS bad parenting at the highest level.

And no. I’m not going to play into their caricature of what right wing actually is. That sounds like a great way to derail and divide a strong movement.

4
Wtf_socialismreally 4 points ago +4 / -0

So your idea to counter their over tolerance is to swing that pendulum all the way to the other side and be equally or more intolerant?

You need to gain some more perspective on this country's precarious situation if you can't see that mirroring their bullshit is going to be catastrophic when the pendulum swings back. And it ALWAYS swings back.

1
ThisTrainHasNoBrakes 1 point ago +1 / -0

For a time, yes. That is what it will take.

We can’t win 9/10 battles but never retake any ground and call it a win. That is losing. That is why today is so momentous - we actually moved the needle back a bit.

But let’s be real here - you and I both know there is no chance of conservatives fighting that hard. I would settle for us fighting.

2
ThomasJ 2 points ago +10 / -8

Yup. It happened because of people like him. Gay people have existed forever? You know what else existed? Hanging gays from trees

10
AlcoholicRetard 10 points ago +12 / -2

It happened because gays have always wanted to groom children and our society has become so tolerant of them they feel safe doing it out in the open now.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
2
lilbuffy 2 points ago +2 / -0

This happened because they had nothing left to fight for and they still want the attention and victim status. Give them an inch they'll take a mile.

-7
deleted -7 points ago +1 / -8
3
Jacques1102 3 points ago +4 / -1

What?Gay people are secretly jews?I don't like LGBT crap but to argue that jews invented gays is retarded.

2
GodEmperor2024 2 points ago +2 / -0

I gave you some names to research. Start with Magnus Hirschfeld. Both homosexual and Jewish publications are quite open about the fact that Jews have invented LGBT as a political movement.

Not all gays are Jews obviously, but LGBT activism is driven by Jews.

-1
Jacques1102 -1 points ago +1 / -2

And?You gave 3 people that happened to be jewish out of the hundreds of non jews that were also apart of the movement.Stop red herring

2
GodEmperor2024 2 points ago +2 / -0

Still not convinced? Have a look at this then:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:LGBT_people_by_religion

There are 108 Christian LGBT activists, and 648 Jewish LGBT activists. Apart from the fact that many racial Jews claim to be atheists, in the number above Jews are overrepresented by several orders of magnitude:

There's 2380 millions of Christians and only 14 millions of Jews in the world. Therefore the Christians LGBT should be 170 times more than the Jews.

If you do the math, Jews are literally one thousand times more likely to be LGBT activists than Christians.

Happy?

1
GodEmperor2024 1 point ago +1 / -0

I gave you the most important, influential leaders who invented the movement. I didn't give you 3 random guys.

Political movements have leaders. Always.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
4
GodEmperor2024 4 points ago +4 / -0

Name one Spartan who was in a gay marriage.

1
thunderpussy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Loads of pirates had something very much like gay marriage that had the force of law.....

-1
XDingoX83 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Oh boy did they. I can't remember where I read it but how it worked is when a boy would start training they would be paired with a spartan solder who would be responsible for taking care of them. The solder would uh... yeah fuck the shit out of the poor kid. Anyway by the time the kid became an adult they would all be more into hanging out with each other and pounding each other's asses that their wives would have to go track them down and force the solders to impregnate them.

20
HiddenDekuScrub 20 points ago +21 / -1

No, we never attempted the solution he suggests. He's talking about the "no government marriage at all" idea.

Marriage is, at heart, a religious institution. Let churches do what they want without anyone being forced to acknowledge it. There are other ways we could handle the bureaucratic side (very rough example: only civil unions) without redefining marriage.

7
Shalomtoyou 7 points ago +10 / -3

I met gay couples who called each other husband and the like back when people like Obama still supporter traditional marriage. Heck, that was before anyone knew who Obama was.

No one cared. We understood then it was your same sex partner.

Then they forced it through on paper. And made you care.

2
XDingoX83 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yup no one cares when people are free to do what they want. But as soon as government starts forcing things either way causes people to start to take notice. Less government is better.

6
anon9361 6 points ago +7 / -1

Super easy fix. Make civil unions protected at the federal level and voila, same as “marriage”.

8
Neze 8 points ago +8 / -0

The primary reason it was an issue before is that spouses in a traditional marriage are granted a number of rights that civil unions are not. Hospital visitations, taxes, etc. Just match those up and it will be less of a problem.

4
Some_Rando_Web_Dev 4 points ago +6 / -2

It's not "traditional marriage", it's Marriage. Period. There's nothing equal with it. Stop changing words like a libtard.

2
Yaemz123 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not true. Executor can handle hospital stuff, the government actually taxes married couples more, and shouldn't be directly taxing citizens anyway.

1
Wtf_socialismreally 1 point ago +1 / -0

shouldn't be directly taxing citizens anyway.

While true, a separate issue and not one of culture.

4
Yaemz123 4 points ago +4 / -0

No need for a fix. All the complaints already had simple solutions. "I can't visit in hospital or make decisions for them" is fixed with executorship papers. "I want to be on their insurance" is not a government issue. That should be handled by negotiations between people and their insurance companies like any private issue. "I want my love recognized" is a false issue, since marriage has nothing to do with love. Throwing out marriage as a standard legal union between a man and a woman to placate extremists is not needed. We don't have to give up anything.

2
anon9361 2 points ago +2 / -0

While personally, I agree with you, marriage is a religious covenant, not a legal one.

2
Yaemz123 2 points ago +2 / -0

Marriage has been practiced in nearly every society in all of history, regardless of that society's religion/religions. It is both a religious and civil covenant.

1
Alarm_1 1 point ago +2 / -1

Agree 100%

17
XDingoX83 17 points ago +23 / -6

No we got to drag kids because the right let the left dictate the culture. Dudes have been fucking dudes for centuries and they weren’t having drag kid story hour. It was the normalization of LGBT culture. There are gays who are not part of lgbt culture do not conflate the two. You are asking for trouble if you do. If you want a back last 10 times worse than what we have now, try and outlaw contraceptives or just being gay. There is a middle ground where we don’t have this LGBt shit but people are free to live their lives.

Don’t be a fucking authoritarian.

2
Election_Quotes 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yes. And being authoritarian in the name of God ignores the fact that Jesus didn’t institute authoritarian rule, he made it about self rule based on personal transformation.

0
XDingoX83 0 points ago +4 / -4

Not everyone is Christian the first amendment is a thing and it goes both ways. Make arguments without your belief in god

1
Election_Quotes 1 point ago +1 / -0

I was agreeing with you. My point is that Christians being authoritarian is not following the teachings of Christianity.

1
krzyzowiec 1 point ago +1 / -0

We moved away from Christianity as the basis for morals. That was the issue.

1
XDingoX83 1 point ago +1 / -0

And why was that? Because those who create the media, showed christian values to be inept and wrong and people believed it. Look at TV and movies. They always show the christians as evil, or molesting children. So of course people would abandon that faith if that is what they are fed. I have been posting the same comment over and over. Conservatives hate art, they abandoned it so the left took up the mediums that tell the stories that perpetuate values. Before people would know all the stories from the bible and tell them as a way to embed moral values. Now, it's drag kid story time.

Conservatives are at fault for this for leaving the vacuum that the left filled.

6
SlapUp4 6 points ago +8 / -2

Libertarians are really fucking naive.

They're just as short-sighted as communists.

"It will work this time! For sure."

2
BoatingAccident 2 points ago +3 / -1

Plus the guy you responding to totally misses the issue of states rights states can do whatever the fuck they want

2
XDingoX83 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah no they can’t the constitution does prevent them from doing a lot. So by your reasoning can California ban straight sex?

1
BoatingAccident 1 point ago +1 / -0

It was a bit of hyperbole but generally speaking the states can do what they want

13
DestroyerofCobwebs 13 points ago +14 / -1

The state has a vested interest in marriage, because both studies and common sense tell us that children are important for the survival of the nation, healthy well-adjusted children are better then weird goblin children, and the most effective way to avoid making goblin adults is to raise children in traditional, nuclear family households.

Arguing that the state has no business in marriage at all, is 75% of the way towards allowing gay marriage, etc. Because that argument misses the essential reason why the state is involved in the first place, and at that point it's just people playing relationship games, and you might as well let a dude marry his pet donkey if he wants.

4
JackMac 4 points ago +4 / -0

If people can’t figure out how to survive without the state’s help, then neither the people nor the state should survive.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
2
DestroyerofCobwebs 2 points ago +2 / -0

Have ya met many, people?

I like the idea, wish it could be that way too. But brother, there's a lot of dumb mother fuckers out there.

2
JackMac 2 points ago +2 / -0

Your argument is not persuasive, calling people dumb motherfuckers and that state regulation of them is needed is elitist

1
DestroyerofCobwebs 1 point ago +1 / -0

Our country was founded by elitists, as was basically every nation on earth. For good reason. You sound more like an anarchist than a libertarian. Some degree of regulation around behavior is necessary for society to function.

1
JackMac 1 point ago +1 / -0

I disagree, Elitists wouldn’t say all men are created equal

1
DestroyerofCobwebs 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's what they said in the Declaration of Independence, which was and is basically a propaganda document designed to rally the Americans against the King.

The Constitution as originally written allowed states to decide who could vote, and most of them had already decided that only white male land owners could vote, at the time of ratification. Not only did the founders not address that, the Constitution itself is rife with elitist language, counting people as 3/5ths of a person, slaves who run away to another state have to be returned, 35 to be a Senator, etc.

So at best, their principles and high minded ideology espoused in the Declaration, didn't make it into the actual founding documents.

2
SowellWasRight 2 points ago +2 / -0

Marriage is the joining of a man and woman in the eyes of God. It is a metaphysical concept. A "marriage" license is just a bundle of legal contracts between two people. Whatever else happens, the legal contracts need to stop being named marriage.

1
flashersenpai 1 point ago +2 / -1

The state has a vested interest in marriage...important for the survival of the nation

The state has only interest in itself and its power. Things which advantage it are necessarily to your DIS-advantage. The nation can thrive by making slaves of its people.

The government has involved itself in marriage extensively and has pushed society into a nation of families destroyed by laws. To even suggest that today's marriage has anything to do with family or households is absurd.

1
DestroyerofCobwebs 1 point ago +2 / -1

I think it goes without saying that I'm not talking about the modern concept of marriage, but the traditional one, rooted as much in social responsibilities as it was in personal rights.

12
deleted 12 points ago +29 / -17
7
Soundwave 7 points ago +7 / -0

Look into Classical Liberalism. It’s got the appeal of libertarianism without the pie in the sky absurdity:

Classical liberals argued for what they called a minimal state, limited to the following functions:

  • A government to protect individual rights and to provide services that cannot be provided in a free market. A common national defence to provide protection against foreign invaders.

  • Laws to provide protection for citizens from wrongs committed against them by other citizens, which included protection of private property, enforcement of contracts and common law.

  • Building and maintaining public institutions.

  • Public works that included a stable currency, standard weights and measures and building and upkeep of roads, canals, harbours, railways, communications and postal services.

-5
GodEmperor2024 -5 points ago +3 / -8

Classical liberalism is a pie in the sky absurdity too. It completely ignores ethnic conflicts. It ignores that a certain ethnicity will pool resources and use strong ingroup preference to dominate society with money. It turns the society into a plutocracy.

It transfers the power from the government to hedge fund managers.

5
Soundwave 5 points ago +6 / -1

Please don’t tell me you are saying “the Jews run everything.”

-1
GodEmperor2024 -1 points ago +2 / -3

Well, yes. It's true. It is demonstrably true. Trump himself is on video saying that Israel controls Congress.

6
XDingoX83 6 points ago +8 / -2

You blame free and open trade for shipping jobs off when it was trade deals that were the opposite of free trade signed by politicians. Riiiiiight. Blame the libertarians for government failures. That is fucking rich. NAFTA and other “free trade” fucked the United States and had nothing to do with making an even playing field. If the United state actually competed fairly on the world stage we would be a net exporter. It is not actually cheaper to produce in china once you remove all the limitations placed on the US and if the rest of the world forced china to play by the rules. But keep blaming the party who gets less than 1% of the vote for the current economic conditions. Some how it’s our fault. Fucking retard.

The reason why all this Lgbt shit has happened is because conservatives place no value in art. So, liberals became the drivers of culture. They wrote all the books, movies, plays, tv shows. They became the teachers of morality through those mediums.

As much as this site hates him. Ben Shapiro is right in what he is doing with the daily wire. By offering alternatives it allows the right to steer the culture.

6
Liberty_Prime 6 points ago +9 / -3

Libertarianism is small government.

Leftist is powerful centralized government.

0
Block_Helen 0 points ago +2 / -2

Libertarianism is small government.

So they say, but it doesn't work that way in real life. The end result of libertarian policies (or lack thereof) is social breakdown which leads to powerful, centralized government, every time.

2
Liberty_Prime 2 points ago +2 / -0

Dude just said we need to seize the means of corporation.

Sound familiar?

0
-c-i-a- 0 points ago +1 / -1

Many, if not most, of the new users here confuse libertarianism with anarchy.

Likely because they're wayward, ignorant young adults.

1
Liberty_Prime 1 point ago +2 / -1

There are some who crave authoritarianism.

Because that never goes poorly./s

-5
deleted -5 points ago +2 / -7
2
Liberty_Prime 2 points ago +2 / -0

"Freedom is slavery."

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
Liberty_Prime 0 points ago +2 / -2

Seize the means...you're quite the communist, huh?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
MagaDistributor 1 point ago +1 / -0

big global corporations taking over.

No, that's Fascism brought by Globalist's. Global corporations need corrupt government's to compete. They're subsidized parasites.

1
anon9361 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ehhh my take on Friedman isn’t “libertarian economics”, but capitalism and globalization which imo pushed our jobs overseas. The push for manufacturing overseas wasn’t for open borders or self sufficiency, it was purely to make more money for stakeholders a la capitalism.

“Social Responsibility of Business. There is one and only one social responsibility of business–to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.”

0
GodEmperor2024 0 points ago +3 / -3

(((Friedman))) was absolutely wrong or he was lying. Every modern corporation does racial and sexual propaganda and spends a shitton of money doing it.

According to his theories, a company should not be interested in whether you take it up the ass. Clown World has proven him wrong.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
3
XDingoX83 3 points ago +3 / -0

We didn't have free trade among countries. All the "free trade" deals were globalist wet dreams that limited the United States and made it easier for companies to exploit poor nations. Imagine if companies actually had to incur the cost of exporting raw materials to Vietnam and then reimport it into the US. Countries like China cheat by keeping massive amounts of people poor to lower labor costs. So I agree that trade with china and the like should be limited until they play by the same rules as the US. However, with europe trade could easily be more open and free since they follow many of the same rules.

1
Block_Helen 1 point ago +2 / -1

There's nothing wrong with free trade, fairly negotiated between parties. We didn't/don't have that. We have shitty deals where the US gets screwed because leftists/statists/globalists are in charge.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
11
Forty_Five 11 points ago +13 / -2

I would've agreed with you 10 years ago.

The faggots have proven that they're incapable of the "live and let live" concept. They need to constantly shove their deviant lifestyle down our throats and indoctrinate our children into their unholy cult. Fuck them. They had their chance and abused it.

7
XDingoX83 7 points ago +8 / -1

I’ll say what I said else where. Stop abandoning the arts. Art is how we teach morality. Stories are how we pass on our heroes. We need to get more conservatives writing and producing.

Being an authoritarian is a path we should not want to go down

5
Dicebag 5 points ago +5 / -0

YES. I hate the typical conservative's take on the arts. They pay money month after month just to hate-watch some Netflix/Disney garbage, then cry about how there's no good entertainment. Meanwhile, they think they're "fighting the culture war" because they're subscribed to the podcast of some political pundit who also just sits around and complains.

If politics is downstream of culture, culture is downstream of entertainment. Our side makes almost no entertainment, and when someone actually does, conservatives never support them.

2
XDingoX83 2 points ago +2 / -0

I am glad there are others who appreciate this.

I've been writing a book but I am a terrible writer. (-_- )

1
Dicebag 1 point ago +1 / -0

You should check out the writing community on Minds.com. That seems to be where right-wing creatives have gone for their social media presence. I think #writingcommunity is the main hashtag they use to find each other, so maybe you can get some insight from them.

I'm on Minds too, but I'm more of a visual artist. @Dicebaggery if you want a fren to show you your way around.

1
XDingoX83 1 point ago +1 / -0

Added you

7
TheMadManDidItAgain 7 points ago +9 / -2

So... you don't care if a 40 year old man fucks a 10 year old child? You don't care if a 40 year old man fucks a goat? You don't care if a 40 year old man fucks a dog?

At which point do you care? I'm fairly libertarian as well, but what's right is right, and what's wrong is wrong. This is the fault with strict libertarians, they allow and excuse truly abhorrent behavior just so long as it doesn't affect them directly.

I understand your point though, but you're wrong with your message. I agree that marriage is strictly a religious construct. I also believe that nuclear marriage is the only form of marriage that should be recognized. Why? Because a family cannot be created with gay people. And it is in America's interest to keep the citizenry going and growing, and this is why a marriage tax break makes sense... (although, I think there should be a flat tax which would wipe this out, but with our current system, a marriage tax break makes sense).

You are conflating bleach with drugs. Some drugs are illegal because they provide no benefit to a society and damage a society. I'm fine with bad drugs being illegal (and less harmful drugs being legal, like alcohol). The point of a society is to grow, and illicit drugs prevent that and cause a burden on the people. It's not simply "if you want to do drugs, more power to you..." because it affects everybody. Somebody doing drugs doesn't directly affect you, but you pay for their care when they can't, and you pay for it with higher crime rates.

Libertarian gets you only so far...

2
SowellWasRight 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ok, so child abuse. Animal cruelty. Those are your examples? You don't see how those violate the non-aggression principle? Bad faith argument.

"I'm fairly libertarian as well, but...(appeal to legislate morality)". No. No, you're not. Libertarians, and also biblical Christians, don't believe in legislating morality.

You justify M contracts because the tax breaks are necessary, then undermine your own argument.

Marriage is a metaphysical concept in which a man and woman are joined in the eyes of God. Separate from that, there are legal contracts individuals make between themselves and the government. The word marriage refers to one of those two things. You have to pick.

1
TheMadManDidItAgain 1 point ago +1 / -0

You said, "I don't care who you fuck just don't tell me about it." I pointed out cases where, I think you care, and you're like "that's a bad faith argument." No, that's a real argument. I care that an adult cannot have sex with a child. There's no bad faith there. I care.

I'm also, get this, an atheist. I don't believe in God. But, I understand people do, and I respect it. And, I did get married at a church. And I do believe that marriage is a contract among a man, woman, and God... much like a braid. And I believe it's ok for the government to recognize a religious marriage in the interest of the country. Process that one!

It's true, I don't believe in God. But I believe in the religious institution being incredibly important. I don't project my beliefs on anybody, not a single person. I'm a religion ally actually, and support it completely.

I'm not saying marriage justifies tax breaks. I'm saying that, with our current shitty tax system, it makes sense. I'm saying I'd like a new tax system that doesn't recognize it and there is just a simple flat tax. It's like... I have a shitty car, ok. I still think that the car should have good tires, so with cars, I advocate having good tires. My preference is that I get a new car, one that floats on a cushion of air... but that's not what I have, so I have to deal with having a shitty car that needs new tires. Sometimes you have to deal with the problems you have instead of scrapping it all.

1
flashersenpai 1 point ago +3 / -2

"So what you're saying is..." Okay Cathy Newman.

1
TheMadManDidItAgain 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't understand.

105
TrumpWonByALandslide 105 points ago +106 / -1

Let's Gooooooooo!!!

40
Iteachfuckingscience 40 points ago +62 / -22

Butt fucking faggots should go to jail. And they should NOT get married.

That kind of torture is reserved for real men.

62
DrWeeGee 62 points ago +65 / -3

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Don't change my mind

6
Gregorina 6 points ago +6 / -0

It is by definition. Having to even say its between a man and a woman is unnecessary and doesn’t make sense. “An apple is an apple”

4
DrWeeGee 4 points ago +4 / -0

CNN: "this is a banana"

2
DieHeretic 2 points ago +2 / -0

"Oooooh, sexy time!"

-Don LeMon

12
Soundwave 12 points ago +28 / -16

I’m in the minority here but what two consenting adults do behind closed doors is absolutely none of the government’s business. And yes that includes “butt fucking faggots.”

Sorry but you’re wrong about this, regardless of how real of a man you think you are.

13
Some_Rando_Web_Dev 13 points ago +14 / -1

I don't have a problem with that by itself, but that's not what we're dealing with. We have cultural marxism masquerading around as faggots. We have faggots who are just child predators, and then we have some quiet folks who want to do gay sex in their homes. I don't care about the last group, it's the other ones that make it impossible for us to abide with the other.

4
Long_time_lurker 4 points ago +6 / -2

There's also the fact that anal sex is just plain unhealthy (for gays or straights) and we're on our second major disease spread by it, first with GRID/HIV and now monkeypox, the fact that it's unhealthy, they're promiscuous, and HIV compromises immune systems means that they're a major disease vector now.

12
AlcoholicRetard 12 points ago +20 / -8

Ok groomer

11
Iteachfuckingscience 11 points ago +15 / -4

We can disagree.

It’s all about consent of the governed. All I know is God is an angry God. And I do not want to fuck around with any of it.

If two faggots fuck buttholes then they are judged. If I elect people who appoint judges that decree buttfucking is legal and lawful, then I am judged.

That’s the difference bro. I want nothing to do with buttfucking faggotry. As for me and my house? We will serve the Lord.

3
Hunter77 3 points ago +3 / -0

As we've seen, if people do things behind closed doors, they'll want it normalized, and normalizing inevitably leads to grooming.

9
Skogin 9 points ago +9 / -0

what two consenting adults do behind closed doors

This argument is explicitly not about government sanctioned gay marriage, adoption of infants, and promoting degeneracy in public schools.

5
Take_it_back 5 points ago +6 / -1

Sodomy and contraception are in a different category than gay marriage. I think it’s reasonable for any two people to be able to sign a contract to split up their shit or whatever other stuff you get from a marriage contract. I don’t care about calling it marriage and I don’t consider it as fundamental as bodily autonomy but I think there should be equality of contract law.

3
Skogin 3 points ago +3 / -0

People are free to make contracts like that - isn’t the core point of marriage about family and especially children?

1
Take_it_back 1 point ago +2 / -1

Fuck if I know. I was married, I still don’t know what the point was.

2
papa_newguineapig 2 points ago +2 / -0

💯

6
GodEmperor2024 6 points ago +7 / -1

They never keep it "behind closed doors". Everything that a member of society does affects everyone else, at the very least because they can vote. The "behind closed doors" is a fantasy of lolbertarian cucks who pretend things that don't directly and immediately impact them don't exist.

0
lordvon 0 points ago +2 / -2

they become gay through sexual abuse. cycle continues. like a virus

2
Millie1234 2 points ago +9 / -7

Someone is protesting a little too strongly...

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
flashersenpai 1 point ago +1 / -0

stack up or fuck off

-2
Liquid_Hot_MAGA -2 points ago +1 / -3

Damn you're a disgusting bigot

3
July_1776 3 points ago +3 / -0

Doom music intensifies.

1
Cayde_Wants_To_MAGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

Eh…. I think they are ripping and tearing their own bodies just fine without Doomslayer

Sorry for that mental image.

1
Lelleck 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, not just „Let’s gooo“ - get educated on all the mentioned cases.

It is time to know your shit.

45
aaafirefly123 45 points ago +56 / -11

Please don’t get rid of contraception.

There is nothing wrong or immoral about preventing yourself from getting pregnant.

36
Kinkinnatus 36 points ago +36 / -0

You'd have to take it up with your state legislature if the SCOTUS reversed the ruling. It's not like there'd be a federal ban and that's the whole point.

21
bidensmissingbrain 21 points ago +21 / -0

Yep. Power to the states is power to the people.

Hey, I think I just came up with one of those leftist-like chants: "Power to the states! Power to the people!"

0
QuickHands 0 points ago +2 / -2

Nifty chant but I'd shoehorn 50 in there -- power to the 50 states (one person), power to the people (rest of crowd)

Better cadence and makes it clear you're talking about states/provinces/districts/etc as opposed to the various administrative 'states' around the world

15
45FortheWin 15 points ago +15 / -0

It's more about taking a look at whether these are rights protected at the federal level by the Constitution. If not, these are issues for the states to decide.

7
deleted 7 points ago +14 / -7
9
peterstrzoked 9 points ago +9 / -0

👆pull out game is strong with this one 👌

8
Basedsliceofwinning 8 points ago +8 / -0

My wife and I agreed that having another kid wouldn't be the end of the world. So she removed her IUD because she hated it.

I've been pulling out for 3 years. No pregnancies. It CAN work lol. Just gotta be in a commited long-term relationship, and have the wisdom and experience to know yourself.

2
Zelenskyscockholster 2 points ago +2 / -0

I can't say I've been doing it for quite that long, but yes, it's only unreliable if you don't actually pull out in time.

At least that's my experience.

1
Bidensbuttplug 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is there anything better than pulling out and having your girl suck her pussy juices off of your cock along with your cum?

6
TRUMP_1776 6 points ago +7 / -1

This guy never fucks apparently

1
DarkDrai 1 point ago +1 / -0

But it helps.

0
Megadog3 0 points ago +1 / -1

Are you retarded or just insanely fucking retarded?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Megadog3 1 point ago +2 / -1

lol keep telling yourself that

0
Sliced_Beef_Brisket 0 points ago +1 / -1

Are you 13?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
Sliced_Beef_Brisket 0 points ago +1 / -1

I'd rather not put my financial future in the hands of some chick's timing. You do you.

2
KidsSeeGhosts 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nobody's trying to, please understand how courts work

1
Tendiesandkekchup 1 point ago +1 / -0

Too late.

45
President_Elect_Marx 45 points ago +53 / -8

Yes faggots, we’re coming for your shit-dicking.

  • Clarence Thomas, probably
5
TrannysArentHuman 5 points ago +8 / -3

You can keep your puddin' pops.

NO HOLY UNIONS.

8
ThisTrainHasNoBrakes 8 points ago +8 / -0

Holy unions are fine.

It’s unholy unions we should be preventing.

1
DeplorableCentipede 1 point ago +2 / -1

I wonder why he didn’t include Loving v. Virginia in that list... it’s the direct precedent for Obergefell.

0
RizzlieDoodad 0 points ago +3 / -3

Sodomy is blowjobs too. And there's women who enjoy giving em

32
JSullz59 32 points ago +33 / -1

Yeeeehawwww. Climbing back up the slippery slope with crampons.

12
AOCs_tits_4ever 12 points ago +12 / -0

Perfect image

3
librul_tearsaholic 3 points ago +3 / -0

Basement Joe tried to stop this with the tampon shortage, but never underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up. He should have had (Not a) Doctor Jill read that notecard to him so he'd get it right

31
tflst5 31 points ago +31 / -0

The truth is that if abortion was this fundamental right that the public desperately wanted.. Congress would pass a Constitutional Amendment and ground it into our bill of rights. Then the supreme court could do nothing. But that doesn't happen. Its never going to happen. Because no matter how many fake polls and bullshit propaganda the Democrats put into the publics brains - killing babies will never become acceptable in a Democracy.

11
SisterCovfefe 11 points ago +11 / -0

Yep

Congress loves to have the Courts do their work.

4
Hunter77 4 points ago +4 / -0

Well, not to the numbers needed to pass an amendment, at least. 50% of the country, sure, but that's not enough.

2
45ForEver2024 2 points ago +2 / -0

This. This has been used as a carrot on a stick for too long.

27
BasedMedicalDoctor 27 points ago +34 / -7

YES!!!!

FUCK YOU DOOMERS

DOOMERS BTFO

BTFO

T

F

O

THE GOOD GUYS ARE WINNING

16
wwwchae 16 points ago +16 / -0

Only if we don't stop and become complacent.

Regardless of anything complacency and dooming will lead to our destruction.

5
Trumpdup4prez 5 points ago +5 / -0

God wins

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Shayhawk 1 point ago +2 / -1

Are we?

We won a couple battles but the war is not going in our favor at the moment...

22
cyberspace_cowboy1 22 points ago +22 / -0

Yes, give the power to the states. Each state can be more custom and modular to be competitive or better represent the people that live there.

Want to live in a state with constitutional carry, enforcement of illegal drug use and out of bounds camping (or homeless living in tents). How about marriage can only be between a biological man and biological woman? Oh we also don't allow state or federal entities to corrupt our children. Sound good? Great move to our state!

1
ab1ab1 1 point ago +2 / -1

That sounds good, until your state is invaded by degenerates and other low-lifes who then get themselves elected to the legislature (and eventually statewide) and then repeal the laws which made your state great to begin with, and pass new ones which cement their degeneracy as "legal".

3
PensivePatriot 3 points ago +3 / -0

I see that you too must live in Colorado.

21
never42 21 points ago +22 / -1

He mentioned them in the context that they are NOT affected.

The Court today declines to disturb substantive due process jurisprudence generally or the doctrine’s application in other, specific contexts. Cases like Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479 (1965) (right of married persons to obtain contraceptives)*; Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558 (2003) (right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts); and Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. 644 (2015) (right to same-sex marriage), are not at issue.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
45ForEver2024 1 point ago +2 / -1

That is Alito not Thomas's comment.

3
never42 3 points ago +3 / -0

No, that's Thomas. pg.118 into 119 under heading "THOMAS, J., concurring"

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf

17
_Eric_Ciaramella_ 17 points ago +17 / -0

rubs nipples

10
BarneyFranksNipples 10 points ago +10 / -0

😘

5
4DHopscotch 5 points ago +5 / -0

Lol, you're a freak, BFN.

3
Zelenskyscockholster 3 points ago +3 / -0

Very disrespectful

14
KnoxHarrington 14 points ago +14 / -0

I don't think the government should tell people what they can put into their bodies (contraception or weiners), but I also don't think they're Constitutionally guaranteed.

Any case that was underpinned by Roe should at least be revisited as they were built on a house of cards.

14
XDingoX83 14 points ago +14 / -0

Freedom of association which is an extension of the first amendment. So who you fuck or kiss should be protected in a similar way imo.

Contraceptive falls under the same rules as any other drug. I guess. I don’t see the benefit of limiting peoples ability to control when they get pregnant or if they don’t want to.

Some people want to go too far with this and we all Should seriously take a step back and say okay we got the abortion debate where it should be with the states. Going after trying to ban homosexuals or contraceptive is a terrible idea and will really galvanize the left and alienate moderates for no reason.

11
GoodMorningDystopia 11 points ago +11 / -0

agreed. the contraceptive idea especially. a lot of pro-life, very Christian, very right wing women are huge believers that birth control is a gift from God. this is not going to appeal to most conservatives at all.

5
Alarm_1 5 points ago +5 / -0

I don't disagree 100% but the left has been playing a game of extremes for decades, and we have been the understanding side. We aren't playing a fair game here. I'm not saying we should be going crazy with the authoritarianism or anything, but I am saying that maybe we ought to weigh the pros and cons heavily before we decide that this was enough. We need to claw back every inch that we can while we have the momentum because you can be damn sure that the second the left get the opportunity, they will do the same. Just my opinion, for what it's worth.

1
DeplorableCentipede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is freedom of association really meant to protect sexual acts though? The First Amendment only says we have the “right to assemble”, and in my mind at least having sex isn’t an assembly.

4
XDingoX83 4 points ago +4 / -0

Freedom to associate however I want. Would the government be able to regulate if my wife were to suck my dick?

1
DeplorableCentipede 1 point ago +1 / -0

As far as the constitution is concerned, I don’t believe it prevents the government from doing so.

4
XDingoX83 4 points ago +4 / -0

At the federal level maybe depending on how you view freedom of association. However, I wouldn't want the federal government to have the power to regulate who I can have sex with.

1
DeplorableCentipede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Then you should petition Congress to make a Constitutional Amendment to that effect.

1
Tendiesandkekchup 1 point ago +1 / -0

Apparently your state government has the right to now.

That’s sodomy.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
12
MickHigan2 12 points ago +16 / -4

Butt pirates seethe and cope (and shit their adult diapers)

3
QuickHands 3 points ago +3 / -0

Found Ethan Klein's account

11
BarneyFranksNipples 11 points ago +11 / -0

AND THE PENDULUM BEGINS SWINGING BACK TOWARDS THE RIGHT

1
TheMadManDidItAgain 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not yet...

We can't celebrate too soon. These are nice victories, but they may just be a bone...

10
RagnarD 10 points ago +10 / -0

Oh oh oh! Do the NFA of 1936 next.

5
brother_red 5 points ago +5 / -0

1934, but yeah!

2
RagnarD 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thanks for catching that!

10
pburgpait 10 points ago +13 / -3

Social libertarianism is what got us to the point where pedophilia is acceptable for a large part of the population, it's time to use our power to restore morality in America

16
XDingoX83 16 points ago +19 / -3

How does contraception lead to tranny story time? Like, body autonomy is a thing. Abortion is wrong cause you’re killing another person. But if a girl wants to take birth control that’s a choice they get to make with their body. Be careful pushing too far because the backlash could be worse.

4
deleted 4 points ago +9 / -5
12
XDingoX83 12 points ago +15 / -3

Stop imposing your views on others. The first amendment allows you to practice your religion without government intervention but you don’t get the right to impose your religious edicts on to others.

3
flashersenpai 3 points ago +7 / -4

It untied the nation

"The nation" go fuck yourself collectivist

0
Asilimum 0 points ago +3 / -3

It makes sex purely about sex and not the creation of life.

Sooo should we ban sex unless its for the purpose of creating life? I can see some people getting pissed about that

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
4
basshead 4 points ago +5 / -1

This is the backlash the Left now experiences from pushing too far this past decade. What back lash would actually happen on our end? We go back to status quo?

Fuck their hormone birth control; their pharma-piss leaches into the water supply. IUDs and rubbers have merit however.

3
TheSpaceForce 3 points ago +3 / -0

I am also pro-contraceptive but if the SC reverses its ruling I would still find it to be a good thing. It would just mean the issue would go back to the state, strengthening states rights and reducing the power of the federal gov.

3
spuger 3 points ago +3 / -0

If the hoes have their own problems to bitch about, the pedos cant use them as foot soldiers.

1
pburgpait 1 point ago +1 / -0

Contraception is ok in my opinion, but abortion, gay marriage and other immoral things allowed the left to move the Overton window further and further and let more perverted things seem normal. I'm not advocating for a full blown theocracy but we should take a slightly heavier hand in morality and law

1
XDingoX83 1 point ago +1 / -0

Detach marriage from government. Then let religion dictate marriage which is how it should be. I’m also anti abortion it is the killing of another person. The Overton window moved not because these things exist. The Overton window moved because the right abandons art as pointless and then the left pushes the Overton window through media. Conservatives need to start being writers, artists, producers. Not just historical facts but stories that teach people moral values.

1
_Cabal_ 1 point ago +1 / -0

Social libertarians are just libertine degenerates.

9
XLNutts 9 points ago +9 / -0

Do affirmative action.

7
BlacknWhite 7 points ago +7 / -0

I concur.

5
xBigCoffinHunter 5 points ago +5 / -0

I honestly never cared about gay marriage. Then it snowballed into wax my balls and let toddlers put dollar bills in a dudes underwear. Fuck em.

5
Spawnlingman 5 points ago +5 / -0

Oh my god he's gonna get himself killed.

8
IrreducibleComplexit 8 points ago +8 / -0

At least not by God.

3
Donger-Lord2 3 points ago +3 / -0

He has cemented his place in Heaven, while ginsburg burns in hell.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
0
DrHavick 0 points ago +2 / -2

A slippery slope to a stronger, Christian nation. Sounds good to me.

4
zigZag590 4 points ago +5 / -1

I love this guy

4
mty_green_go 4 points ago +4 / -0

yes. please end the fag worshipping, maybe I might watch TV again

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
AlphaOverBetaReturns 4 points ago +4 / -0

All of these issues should have been left to the states in the first place.

4
Joshua55 4 points ago +5 / -1

Sodomite marriage should be struck down.

4
hbrad1977 4 points ago +4 / -0

Absolutely too far.

3
Smcnelly 3 points ago +4 / -1

same sex marriage next please

3
PizzaDecorations 3 points ago +3 / -0

... in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is "demonstrably erroneous", we have a duty to "correct the error" established by precedents...

Page 119

3
Cjsmith87 3 points ago +3 / -0

I wish they’d overturn Citizens United. That would go a far way in leveling the playing field for elections.

3
BoerboelMummy 3 points ago +3 / -0

Now do the "Affordable Care Act"

3
IncredibleMrE1 3 points ago +3 / -0

u/Doggos u/pray_for_kekistan u/-f-b-i- it looks the upvote counter broke. Top post in rising is 30 upvotes, and this stickied post has more comments than upvotes.

3
SNRNXS 3 points ago +4 / -1

Obergefell yes, Lawrence and Griswold no. Govt should not have the right to prevent you from buying conctraception or say what you can and can’t do in the bedroom.

-2
Tendiesandkekchup -2 points ago +1 / -3

Not mentioned anywhere in the constitution. Not the federal government’s right to decide.

Better lobby your state legislature and hope there aren’t enough folks more conservative and hard edged than you.

What the federal government “should” do isn’t on the docket here.

1
SNRNXS 1 point ago +1 / -0

I live in Ohio. I doubt that they would ever ban contraceptives here, or in any state, really. But if they did I would definitely be moving.

1
Discordant 1 point ago +1 / -0

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness. This is no medical procedure that kills another person. Privacy also obviously applies.

0
Tendiesandkekchup 0 points ago +1 / -1

Sure buddy.

Those aren’t rights. It’s a preamble.

If those words were of power and use these cases wouldn’t have come up in the first place.

1
Discordant 1 point ago +1 / -0

Then children have no right to life, and there is no justification for preventing abortion.

1
Tendiesandkekchup 1 point ago +1 / -0

Holy shit! You’re right! Murder isn’t mentioned anywhere in the constitution!

Guess that means a state can make it legal!

3
TraitorJoes 3 points ago +4 / -1

This may be the cure for monkeypox, AIDs and a lot of other faggy diseases!

1
DrHavick 1 point ago +1 / -0

Only a pyre can do that.

3
GuerillaYourDreams 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don’t care whether “gays” wanna get married or not. What I don’t want is ANY situation where they can pressure a church to marry them.

3
Ghostbearstark_53 3 points ago +3 / -0

I thought I just saw on crowder he said they would NOT be revisiting those

2
Tendiesandkekchup 2 points ago +2 / -0

It’s written very clearly in the decision.

2
publius1788 2 points ago +2 / -0

The salt will flow!

2
Necrovoter 2 points ago +2 / -0

Clarence Thomas has balls the size of Jupiter.

2
Monz 2 points ago +2 / -0

So whats the argument on the same sex marriage? I understand the whole slipery slope argument and we can see that in real time, but wasnt there like a civil union option with regards to same sex marriages?

2
Ipray4potus 2 points ago +2 / -0

Marriage was created by God. The only reason they pushed for it was to throw it in the faces of Christians. I'm old enough to remember they only wanted legal rights to their partners for medical and financial reasons. Soon after they pushed adoptions and marriage. They lied to get what they wanted. Now you are seeing the destruction to the family and to children.

2
Forty_Five 2 points ago +3 / -1

Overturn fag marriage. That oughta trigger the commies.

2
UsernameChexOut 2 points ago +2 / -0

Also do the whole fucking NFA scam

2
nutmeg 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's not up to him and nobody else seems to agree or care so it probably won't happen

2
KINGOJ007 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yep let's keep this going. We gave these freaks an inch and they took a mile. Hammer them down where they belong.

2
MullyGrubber 2 points ago +2 / -0

Repeal the National Firearms Act!

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
2
chez_blunts 2 points ago +4 / -2

What is meant by "sodomy" exactly? Because I believe that includes blowjobs, and I think 98% of men want blowjobs to stay legal.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
-2
DrHavick -2 points ago +1 / -3

Fuck that, being a faggot should be a crime. We should be burning these sub human faggots alive! But I'll take jail time I suppose.

3
Discordant 3 points ago +3 / -0

You should get jail time, right before your beheading before Allah.

-1
DrHavick -1 points ago +1 / -2

I did just got out of jail. Came out to a lot of bullshit. Lost my job, having marital issues, possibly losing access to my kid just for doing what parents do. But Allah? Can't see him but God is smiling in America today.

1
DTrumpWins2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

They shouldn’t have let you out. But seems like they’re letting all the monsters loose these days.

1
SkeletorsTeeth 1 point ago +1 / -0

How about you revisit forcing experimental shots of healthcare workers?

1
Halo-One 1 point ago +2 / -1

Why contraception?