Supreme Court rebuffs state bids to cut Planned Parenthood funds

irrelevant. those states will be paying PP from the Medicaid fund, as the court pointed out.

 

what you think is desirable, or a habit, is completely meaningless. We live in a free society, with rights enshrined in the constitution. The constitution doesn't permit you to tell other consenting adults what they can do with each other, in a sexual relationship. Your only recourse for thinking gay sex is "icky" is to not engage in it yourself. that's it. that is the extent of your rights regarding homosexuality.

 

Neither is eating so much and exercising so little you become unhealthily obese. Can the government make it illegal to be obese?

It’s not desirable for people to get cancer from smoking or liver disease from drinking. Should the government make smoking and drinking illegal?

It’s not desirable to hate other people so vehemently that you want the government to persecute them. Should the government make your opinions illegal?

 

Here is where we really do need an FBI investigations

The videos suggest criminal behavour but that is not enough to put people in jail or even bring an indictment

Normally the government search for the facts and then proceed with a grand jury

But thats over my head

I do think however that states should be able to withhold handouts to PP

 

What matters is what society thought before the unelected judges told them what to think

 

This is really a waste of time

Neither your or my opinion matters to the 6 unelected judges in washington

 

It has nothing to do with judges. It has to do with the Constitution. No law can violate equal protection.

You blatantly want to violate the Constitution because of your personal bigotry. You are no different than far left gun grabbers.

 

Nonsense

It was judges who legalized homosexuality by telling us what they think the Constitution means

 

The Constitution clearly states that every person is entitled to equal protection under the law. When a law is only enforced against a small portion of the population even though the activity the law outlaws is widely pursued, then equal protection clearly is not happening.

<Rule 2>

Either enforce the law on everyone or don’t have it at all.

 

nope. what society thinks is as meaningless as what you think. The only thing that matters in this country, is the constitution. And the constitution precludes you from imposing your backwards religious nuttery and bigotry onto others.

 

homosexuality has never been illegal, as you are perfectly aware. What was invalidated, were laws regarding sodomy. Those laws were a blatant violation of the plain English wording of the 14th amendment.

Why do you want to take a **** on the constitution?

 

The laws against sodomy were laws against homosexuality, beastiality, and other forms of sexual perversion

 

nope. It was a law against sex that wasn't penis in vagina. Homosexuality has never been, at any time in the history of the US, illegal. You have been repeatedly corrected on this.

 

So you think it's ok for heterosexuals to sodomize each other, but not homosexuals?

 

Keep hanging on to that split hair as long as you can

 

Are you stating for the record that you are not a Christian who favors authoritarian laws that restrict people’s freedoms?

Every Sodomy Law could have stayed on the books had hypocritical heterosexuals who enjoy sodomy themselves not violated the 14th amendment and enforced it in such a way that got violated equal protection.

<Rule 3>

 

I usually dont know what heteros do in private

But homosexuals are very public about their sexual confusion

 

I'm sorry that you can't seem to grasp how the US and constitutional law works. That doesn't actually change how it works though. This is a demonstrable fact. At no time, in the entire history of the United States, was homosexuality ever illegal. No law, in any state, ever outlawed homosexuality.

 

You keep dodging the question. Do you think it's ok for heterosexuals to have oral sex?

Homosexuals aren't sexually confused. And heterosexuals are just at public, if not more so, about their sexuality that homosexuals are.

 

That does not accurately represent my remark. I realize you want to discuss homosexuals. so proceed. Perhaps my attempt to more broaden this is an error.

 

Since when did homosexuals perform sexual acts in public??

 

perhaps it is.

 

He did not say acts, he said confusion.

 

Highly relevent, it is a state run program and the state pays half the money. They should have an equal say and as I cited, if a state law excludes an entity the state legislature can exclude them. For but that was not what the SCOTUS was ruling on, did you even read the ruling and what it was about?

 

Being confused is....illegal???