Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 6

[aCultureWarrior]

For those who followed earlier WHMBR! threads, including Part 5, like I've been, you've probably been waiting to see how the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) was going to rule on discrimination of homosexual and transgender employees in the workplace, hence making peoples sexual desires and gender identity protected under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. I speculated that President Donald Trump's two SCOTUS picks Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, would be deciding votes in promoting the homosexual agenda, as rainbow flag waver Donald Trump didn't pick them for their conservative stance on these issues.

Supreme Court Rules, 6–3, That LGBT Workplace Discrimination Violates Civil Rights Act

Justice Neil Gorsuch's majority decision offers a textualist argument for the ruling.

Discriminating against an employee for being gay or transgender violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a 6–3 decision.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority decision, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

"An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex," Gorsuch argued. "Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids."

Title VII of the law forbids discrimination on the basis of sex; the heart of the dispute was what exactly that means. The three cases the court considered—Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia; Altitude Express v. Zarda; and Harris Funeral Homes v. the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission—revolved around two cisgender men and one transgender woman who claimed they were fired from their jobs for being either gay or trans.​

Read more: https://reason.com/2020/06/15/suprem...il-rights-act/

Without a doubt this will cover more than just protection for morally lost people with same sex desires and gender confusion in the workplace, as they are now protected under the 1964 Civil Rights Act and discrimination (or perceived discrimination) against anyone that identifies as such will now be a federal hate crime.

​

​

 

[KerimF]

After all, if the sexual pleasure (not the sexual act itself) is removed completely from human's fleshes, the great majority of humans (unlike all other living things) would have no reason to work or even to live

This explains why 'every' ruling system, religious or political, in the world has to set, since the far past, well-defined rules (said of God or else) to be followed by its common people.
So while a certain sexual relation/act is allowed in a region as being normal, it may be seen as an evil act or against the rules, in another place.

Those who travel around the world know in advance that they need learning the rules/culture related to sex of every place they intend to visit; otherwise anything may happen... good or bad

So, for example, if Jesus lives now in certain States in America, as He did 2000 years ago, He would be seen as gay or alike , not a man who is not interested in having any sort of sexual relationships in the first place... as I am

 

[OZOS]

Homosexuality should be a capital offense, punishable by death.

 

[ok doser]

Homosexuality should be a capital offense, punishable by death.

That's what God says :thumb:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Homosexuality should be a capital offense, punishable by death.

Attempting to change the subject won't make who the vast majority of TOL'ers (and without a doubt you) voted for President (Donald Trump) and what he and his SCOTUS picks have done to promote the homosexual agenda go away.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

After all, if the sexual pleasure (not the sexual act itself) is removed completely from human's fleshes, the great majority of humans (unlike all other living things) would have no reason to work or even to live :

See post #5.

 

[OZOS]

Attempting to change the subject won't make who the vast majority of TOL'ers (and without a doubt you) voted for President (Donald Trump) and what he and his SCOTUS picks have done to promote the homosexual agenda go away.

The TITLE of this thread claims that homosexuality should be re-criminalized. I said the same thing, so no "subject" was "changed". You are clearly a complete moron, or a homosexual. Probably both.

 

[Arthur Brain]

The TITLE of this thread claims that homosexuality should be re-criminalized. I said the same thing, so no "subject" was "changed". You are clearly a complete moron, or a homosexual. Probably both.

As much as aCW is deranged on the subject, he advocates for homosexuality to be re-criminalized, not for it to be a capital crime. Even he's not that extreme.

 

[KerimF]

See post #5.

You are right.
I am sorry, I didn't notice that your thread is intended to be a poll, not a study of the world's reality concerning homosexuality.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

The TITLE of this thread claims that homosexuality should be re-criminalized. I said the same thing, so no "subject" was "changed". You are clearly a complete moron, or a homosexual. Probably both.

I once again would like to thank you for your invaluable contribution to my WHMBR! series. It's not quite the welcoming that I received in earlier threads, but it's a welcoming nonetheless.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Looking through various websites that tout themselves as "pro traditional family values" such as Peter LaBarbera's Americans For [Some] Truth About Homosexuality and Timmy Wildmon's American Family Association, I saw no mention of this historic sell out of Judeo-Christian values by President Donald Trump and his first SCOTUS pick Neil Gorsuch regarding adding sexual desires and gender identity to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It's only been a day since the ruling, so I'll give them some time and see what they post on the subject.

Phony Tony "Big Tent" Perkin's at the Family Research Council wrote an article, with no mention of Trump SCOTUS pick Neil Gorsuch writing the majority opinion. Obviously phony Tony doesn't want to make his beloved rainbow flag waving President and the Republicrat Party look bad.

https://www.frc.org/updatearticle/20200615/supreme-court

I have to hand it to Calvin Freiburger at Lifesitenews for writing a very good article which named Donald Trump and Neil Gorsuch in the article, as while Lifesitenews does have some very truthful articles at times, it's a website that is devoted to Donald Trump and the Republican Party.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/s...define-sex-write-transgenderism-into-1964-law

I would put this ruling on the same level as Roe v Wade, which Republican appointed Justices were responsible for like they are in this one.

Trump SCOTUS pick Neil Gorsuch, who attends a pro abortion, pro homosexual church, and George Bush Jr. SCOTUS pick John Roberts

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Let's hear from the rainbow flag waver himself:


BREAKING: Trump accepts sweeping pro-transgender SCOTUS decision, calls it ‘very powerful’


The ruling could force churches to recognize same-sex 'marriages' and open restrooms and changing rooms to gender-confused individuals.

Mon Jun 15, 2020 - 5:14 pm EST

President Donald Trump suggested Monday that the administration would not be moving to challenge or mitigate the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling writing “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” into a longstanding law meant to prohibit discrimination on the basis of biological sex.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, Trump’s first addition to the nation’s highest court, wrote the majority opinion for the ruling, which concluded that “sex disicrimination” in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act should be interpreted to mean sexual orientation and gender identity, in addition to its original biological meaning...

"I’ve read the decision, and some people were surprised," the president told reporters at the White House this afternoon, The Hill reported. "But they’ve ruled and we live with their decision. That’s what it’s all about. We live with the decision of the Supreme Court. Very powerful. Very powerful decision actually. But they have so ruled."...

Trump’s other Supreme Court appointee, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, wrote his own dissenting opinion, in which he noted that the “responsibility to amend Title VII belongs to Congress and the President in the legislative process, not to this Court.”

He also wrote, however, that the majority opinion represented an “important victory achieved today by gay and lesbian Americans,” who “advanced powerful policy arguments,” displayed “extraordinary vision, tenacity, and grit,” and “can take pride in today’s result”... “notwithstanding my concern about the Court’s transgression of the Constitution’s separation of powers.”


Read more: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/br...-into-1964-law


The words of Donald Trump shouldn't surprise anyone, as 2 days after being elected President, he stated in an interview on '60 Minutes' that he was "fine" with the Obergefell v Hodges Supreme Court decision legalizing homosexual 'marriage' in the United States.


Rainbow flag waver Donald Trump and some of the phony conservative groups that helped him get elected and continue to support him.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Mass Resistance wrote a good article explaining the recent SCOTUS ruling on adding homosexuality and transgenderism as protected behaviors/identities under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Analysis: The US Supreme Court ruling on ​

Bostock v Clayton County:

What you need to know about it – ​

and what we must do now.

Bizarre ruling changes legal meaning of "sex" in Civil Rights law to include LGBT behaviors. Far-reaching effects beyond just employment.

Yes: We need to start actually resisting. This ruling is not law.

https://www.massresistance.org/docs/...ing/index.html

While Supreme Court rulings were never intended to be laws, they've turned out that way.

I'm disappointed with MassResistance for not mentioning that Donald Trump has a long history of homosexual activism, including his statement that the recent ruling is "very powerful".

These men came to the Massachusetts State House in 2009 to lobby for a bill that would have forced all businesses to allow active "transgender" employees. Now the US Supreme Court says they can become "waitresses" at your local restaurant or kindergarten teachers at your children's school. [MassResistance photos]​

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Peter LaBarbera at Americans for [Some] Truth About Homosexuality posted this excellent 13+ minute video of Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri speaking about the recent Supreme Court decision giving those who identify as homosexual and transgender protection under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, now known as Bostock v Clayton County, GA. There may be hope for the Republicrat Party after all if this young Senator can manage to stick around for years and put a red hot poker stick under religious conservatives that put rainbow flag waver Donald Trump into Office.

Note that in the AFTAH article, Peter LaBarbera didn't hold President Donald Trump accountable for the Justices that he's nominated. If LaBarbera had bothered to post the pro homosexual/transgender words and policies that Donald Trump has said and done over the years, including into his Presidency, it would be obvious to his readers that Donald Trump is the culprit behind this moral anarchy ruling.
https://americansfortruth.com/2020/...to-enforce-homosexual-and-transgender-rights/

 

[Idolater]

Homosexuality should be a capital offense, punishable by death.

acw is arguably a conservative, as there are conservatives who agree that "homosexuality should be re-criminalized". But no conservative believes it should be a capital offense punishable by death, not even acw, who has argued that if that is how we should think, then the Lord in letting the woman caught in adultery go, violated God's law. And that didn't happen, so therefore the death penalty for sexual misconduct is not from God, it is a tradition of man. It was Old Covenant and the New Covenant was dedicated with Christ's blood, and since Christ is God, when He died on the cross, the Old Covenant died with Him.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

acw is arguably a conservative, as there are conservatives who agree that "homosexuality should be re-criminalized". But no conservative believes it should be a capital offense punishable by death, not even acw, who has argued that if that is how we should think, then the Lord in letting the woman caught in adultery go, violated God's law. And that didn't happen, so therefore the death penalty for sexual misconduct is not from God, it is a tradition of man. It was Old Covenant and the New Covenant was dedicated with Christ's blood, and since Christ is God, when He died on the cross, the Old Covenant died with Him.

I know that this is probably asking too much, but would you care to comment on Donald Trump's long history of homosexual activism and thus nominating (and having confirmed) two pro homosexual Supreme Court Justices that ruled in favor of sexual anarchy in the Bostock v Clayton County, GA case?

 

[Idolater]

I know that this is probably asking too much, but would you care to comment on Donald Trump's long history of homosexual activism and thus nominating (and having confirmed) two pro homosexual Supreme Court Justices that ruled in favor of sexual anarchy in the Bostock v Clayton County, GA case?

If you can confirm or comment on my characterization of your position in the OP, sure. Am I right, in setting out your reasoning for why you do not believe homosexuality or any other nonviolent sexual misconduct should be punishable by death?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

If you can confirm or comment on my characterization of your position in the OP, sure. Am I right, in setting out your reasoning for why you do not believe homosexuality or any other nonviolent sexual misconduct should be punishable by death?

Actually I'm trying to figure out why people who post regularly at a Christian conservative website aren't outraged by Donald Trump and his pro homosexual SCOTUS Judges ruling on Bostock v Clayton County, GA.

You don't think libertarians have taken over TOL do you?

 

[Idolater]

Actually I'm trying to figure out why people who post regularly at a Christian conservative website aren't outraged by Donald Trump and his pro homosexual SCOTUS Judges ruling on Bostock v Clayton County, GA.

You don't think libertarians have taken over TOL do you?

Do you think libertarians advocate for killing homosexual offenders?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Do you think libertarians advocate for killing homosexual offenders?

I have no thoughts on the matter, but would like your opinion on something that is relevant in today's world: Donald Trump and his 2 SCOTUS picks giving those that identify as homosexual and transgender protection under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.