Chucktshoes

[quote name="TripleDigitRide" post="1078220" timestamp="1386919442"]My cousin is a machine programmer for the company that's owned by this child's father. He said that there are already at least 5 or 6 multi-million dollar lawsuits in the works. They are suing the child, the parents, and the father's company. Apparently the child was driving a company truck at the time of the accident.[/quote] Here is where the number of victims goes up. How many folks are going to lose their jobs as the father is forces to sell off and liquidate parts or all of his company?

For child pornography!   http://www.wmctv.com/story/24193886/tn-senators-chief-of-staff-investigated-for-child-porn?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content=bufferd753c&utm_medium=facebook     (WMC-TV) - Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander's chief of staff is being investigated for child pornography. A search is underway at the home of Ryan Loskarn, who is the chief of staff at Sen. Alexanders' Washington, D.C. office. Senator Alexander released the following statement regarding the investigation: "I was just informed by the United States Senate legal counsel's office that law enforcement agents are conducting a search of the personal residence of Ryan Loskarn, the chief of staff of my Washington, D.C., office regarding allegations involving child pornography. I am stunned, surprised and disappointed by what I have learned. Based on this information, I immediately placed Mr. Loskarn on administrative leave without pay. The office is fully cooperating with the investigation." According to Roll Call, the "source for news on Capitol Hill", Loskarn also used to work as the communications director for Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), among other House representatives.

I posted this in the other thread, but I I think it belongs in this one as well. :lol: Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

There are several articles over at Daily Kos of folks wetting their knickers over the thought of those meddling conservatives at an Article V convention foiling their schemes. This is the most recent one. It is worth supporting if only to keep the wailing and gnashing of teeth up over there.     http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/04/1260066/-Alert-Art-V-Convention-Threat-Grows-Dec-7-2013-Assembly

This is par for the course for those fuckwits. They get no benefit of the doubt from me. However, as bad as they are, I don't want them going anywhere. Until the bad laws the ATF enforces are gone, I will take their incompetence over a competent and much more ruthless FBI any day. So I say be thankful for the incompetence of the ATF and pray it sticks around until those laws are gone.

:lol: Alright you two. Knock it off. Back to topic, as someone who has faced real discrimination based on sexual orientation by being discharged under DADT (long story)I wouldn't call what took place there real discrimination. A private entity chose not to provide his services to a couple of folks based on personal convictions, boohoo. Unless this baker engaged in actions that caused identifiable harm to the couple like accepting the order and then reneging at the last moment, or calling all the other bakers in town and having them blackballed because they were a couple of 'mos then leave the poor man alone. To the couple in question I would ask why they feel the need to have the approval of everyone to the point of taking folks to court so that they can get some one to officially say they are just as good as everyone else. It speaks to deep seated insecurities in my opinion. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

You're just jealous it wasn't yours. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I'm gonna jump in here and say as someone who has taken a dick and can also take a joke, I thought post #147 was funny. Even when I used to date men I thought leather daddies were funny. Now that I am married to a woman, I still do.

Ha! I can tell you are still kinda new around here. At least every couple of months we have a thread about the gays that goes long and strong and just when you think it has petered out it rises again for another round of flogging.

The deer poaching comment was a lighthearted attempt to translate the concept using a metaphor I thought would be relatable to you. I think any game warden would call boy driving just as guilty of poaching as the boy who did the shooting. Right? If one has a religious objection to homosexuality/gay marriage then to facilitate that would make one guilty as well. Here is different example. I have a friend of mine that works at another location of the same pharmacy chain I do. He is devoutly Catholic and the Church's teaching is that the use birth control is a sin. He does not handle BC pills and especially avoids the morning after pills because to facilitate someone else using them and committing a sin, he would be guilty of the sin of "scandal". (This is how it was explained to me by my friend, if any Catholics on the board are able to offer correction to something I have wrong, please do so. ) As far as the baker being part of what's wrong with the country I would counter that some folks inability to let others live life as they choose without demanding that everyone act and think like they do is a far more problematic issue. Really, how hard is it to go, "Oh, you don't want to bake us a cake, photograph our ceremony or rent us your facility*? Ok. We will take our money elsewhere." *All items that private individuals and in the last example, a church were sued over for declining to provide service to a gay wedding.

If you support or facilitate someone else engaging in an action that you view to be wrong or sinful, do you not bear culpability for your level of participation? It is the same concept as being an accessory to a crime. "Well warden, I didn't poach that deer, my buddy did. I just drove the truck."

This. This. A thousand times this. I don't support the baker's refusal of service. What I do support is his right to make that refusal.

To paraphrase and old saying, "You are what you carry". Considering the number of times I have been called a tool, I guess that means mine are all tools. It could be worse, I could be carrying a queen... :leaving:

Yep. For Ft. Campbell the border doesn't exist. At the gunship I work at we have sold handguns to soldiers stationed at Ft. Campbell. If we can sell a handgun to them, you can buy one from them. Those orders qualify for residency.

Ft. Campbell is located in both states and soldiers stationed at Ft, Campbell can buy/sell in both states at any FFL as long as they can show a copy of their orders. There are no legal worries.

There are kindle readers available for smartphones or PCs and Macs.

There is a sale on Amazon for the kindle version of Andrew Napolitano's Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom for only $1.99. This is good for today, Sunday 12/8 only. “Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn’t.” America’s founding fathers saw freedom as a part of our nature to be protected—not to be usurped by the federal government—and so enshrined separation of powers and guarantees of freedom in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. But a little over a hundred years after America’s founding, those God-given rights were laid siege by two presidents caring more about the advancement of progressive, redistributionist ideology than the principles on which America was founded. Theodore and Woodrow is Judge Andrew P. Napolitano’s shocking historical account of how a Republican and a Democratic president oversaw the greatest shift in power in American history, from a land built on the belief that authority should be left to the individuals and the states to a bloated, far-reaching federal bureaucracy, continuing to grow and consume power each day. With lessons rooted in history, Judge Napolitano shows the intellectually arrogant, anti-personal freedom, even racist progressive philosophy driving these men to poison the American system of government. And Americans still pay for their legacy—in the federal income, in state-prescribed compulsory education, in the Federal Reserve, in perpetual wars, and in the constant encroachment of a government that coddles special interests and discourages true competition in the marketplace. With his attention to detail, deep constitutional knowledge, and unwavering adherence to truth telling, Judge Napolitano moves through the history of these men and their times in office to show how American values and the Constitution were sadly set aside, leaving personal freedom as a shadow of its former self, in the grip of an insidious, Nanny state, progressive ideology. http://www.amazon.com/Theodore-Woodrow-Presidents-Destroyed-Constitutional-ebook/dp/B0078FACL2

There are plenty of threads here rife with that worldview. Everybody wants to be free to live their life how they choose, but almost nobody wants to leave others alone to do the same. It's all "Anarchy for me, tyranny for you".

I just noticed this and I gotta say that is a bunch of crap. The Indiana State Supreme Court took the same position as you and the people of the state and it's legislature were so aghast they changed the law to clear up that but of unjustness. A badge doesn't make a person special and confer upon them power to violate other citizens' rights at will. Badge or no, if a person poses a danger to my family or myself, I will use whatever means I have available to me that I believe are appropriate. Even up to and including lethal force if required. When a government agent can do whatever they want and can't be resisted even if they are 100% wrong with the only recourse being after the fact appeals to a court structure that is biased towards their side we will fall into tyranny shortly after. Oh wait...

  The parallels are obvious and what I believe the basis these cases will be ultimately judged on. I personally do equate them as the same thing. That being said, I also think 6.8 is right with his next statement.   Open for business to the public or not, the government has no right to tell a private entity whom they must do business with. Those portions of the CRA that affected private entities were wrong not because of what it aimed to do, but because the government had no right to do it. Just as the government was wrong being an agent of segregation, it was just as wrong to be an agent of desegregation. Government is obligated to treat folks equally, private entities are not.

I don't disagree with anything you've written here. I only took issue with the phrasing that was overly broad in its indictments. The only reason I chose to point that out is that all too often we paint with these broad brushes and develop preconceptions that would prevent us from finding common ground. Not all gay folks are prancing around in thongs on main street demanding that every church gives them a wedding that would be just faaaabulous! That's all I'm saying.

I'd say that is a pretty broad brush you are painting with. Not all gay folks are driven by pushing an agenda just like not all blacks are saggy pantsed thugs and not all gun owners are inbred rednecks. There are actually some gay folks out there who don't have an agenda, they just want to be left alone to live their lives. Hell, I guarantee there are some gay folks that agree with you that this case was stupid and the couple should have just gone somewhere else and that the baker had the right to choose not to participate.

Meh, I once flipped an 89 escort 4 times side over side coming to a stop upside down on a flat portion of hwy 88 in Maury City. I was doing about 45 mph.It is just as easy to lose control of a vehicle doing the speed limit as it is while speeding. All it takes is just the right amount of driver error. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I agree that if challenged it would be unlikely to withstand a court challenge but an important factor to take into account is that the city does not retain direct control over the Beale St. Entertainment area. Those several blocks, all buildings and the street itself are leased to and administered by a private management company. The city doesn't have direct control over what happens on the street anymore than it has direct control over what happens in the hallways of an office building.