Biden taps Buttigieg to serve as Transportation secretary

[libertybele]

Who a person has a relationship with is neither liberal or conservative.  Belief in a god is neither liberal or conservative.  I have no idea what you are trying to say.  No gay dude is trying to make you go gay anymore than a straight dude is trying to make a gay dude go straight.

If I wanted to go "be a homo" what gives you the right to tell me to go to any place.  I can go do that in your town if I decided to.  Who is the one talking like an authoritarian now?  The entirety of the United States is a free country, and you should be able to practice any religion or have any orientation without someone harassing you to go to SF.

"Sin" is a concept that cannot be imposed on a person, like you're trying to do when you tell me to go somewhere they cater to it.  that's imposition of religion.

IMHO .... time to get back onto topic.  Buttgig was tapped as Biden's transportation secy. 

[Cyber Liberty]

I think the boss has the Christmas Spirit.....   

We both do.

[Hoodat]

One of the most offensive statements of the last two decades was when Sandra Bernhard threatened Sarah Palin with being gang-raped by her black brothers.  This not only implies that black men are rapists, but also implies that being raped by a black man is somehow worse than being raped by a white man.  Yet not a single Democrat called her out for that.

Ayn Rand once described two of the greatest evils in this world.  The first is for a person to hold you to a standard that they themselves don't believe in.  The second is for you to let them do it.

[libertybele]

This is Reuters & Associated Press's headline for their story...why did they even mention he was Gay?

Biden picks Pete Buttigieg, 38, as
transportation secretary-making him most
senior gay official confirmed by Senate

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9056613/Biden-taps-former-rival-Buttigieg-U-S-Transportation-secretary-sources.html

The DEMS are the party of political correctness and the MSM is going to point that out every chance that they get.  Political correctness will continue to be shoved down our throats.

The evil GOP Senate confirming him will be seen as a freakin' milestone!

[mountaineer]

"Sin" is a concept that cannot be imposed on a person, like you're trying to do when you tell me to go somewhere they cater to it.  that's imposition of religion.

Well, that certainly made no sense. Carry on.

[roamer_1]

Who a person has a relationship with is neither liberal or conservative.  Belief in a god is neither liberal or conservative.  I have no idea what you are trying to say.  No gay dude is trying to make you go gay anymore than a straight dude is trying to make a gay dude go straight.

If I wanted to go "be a homo" what gives you the right to tell me to go to any place.  I can go do that in your town if I decided to.  Who is the one talking like an authoritarian now?  The entirety of the United States is a free country, and you should be able to practice any religion or have any orientation without someone harassing you to go to SF.

"Sin" is a concept that cannot be imposed on a person, like you're trying to do when you tell me to go somewhere they cater to it.  that's imposition of religion.

No, and that is exactly the point. The Federal government has no right in the first place to play favorites. If this is a free country, why is there no place for Christians to be free? That's the point.

Under a federalist system - Which is what we ARE, and how we were designed, it is the business of the STATE, not the federal government. If a state wants blue laws because the citizens of that state vote for it, what business is it of anyone else? You don't like it, you are free to leave and go be where it is more to your liking...

And the science of it is in fifty experiments - If one of those experiments fail, it does not bring them all down. But experiments at the federal level do.

You do not have the right to impose your morality on me - And that is what is happening here. Left to their own devices the lion's share of the states would not condone abortion, or gay marriage. Or any of the liberal crap imposed from on high. 'On High'... THAT's authoritarian.

[Knox27]

One of the most offensive statements of the last two decades was when Sandra Bernhard threatened Sarah Palin with being gang-raped by her black brothers.  This not only implies that black men are rapists, but also implies that being raped by a black man is somehow worse than being raped by a white man.  Yet not a single Democrat called her out for that.

Ayn Rand once described two of the greatest evils in this world.  The first is for a person to hold you to a standard that they themselves don't believe in.  The second is for you to let them do it.

Yeah, she is a smug racist who advocated for violence against a woman.  I'm sure a lot of liberals laughed.  I'm sure Madonna laughed. 

[HoustonSam]

Who a person has a relationship with is neither liberal or conservative.  Belief in a god is neither liberal or conservative.

Apologies @Knox27 if you’ve already answered this.  What does “conservative” mean to you?  Do you consider yourself conservative?

[Wingnut]

We both do.

The Kegerator is fixed?  It is a Christmas Miracle!

[Hoodat]

This is Reuters & Associated Press's headline for their story...why did they even mention he was Gay?

Biden picks Pete Buttigieg, 38, as
transportation secretary-making him most
senior gay official confirmed by Senate

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9056613/Biden-taps-former-rival-Buttigieg-U-S-Transportation-secretary-sources.html

I await with great anticipation seeing the headline:

President So-and-so picks Ben Dover, 38, as Education Secretary
making him the most senior official confirmed by the Senate who
prefers having sex with goats.

Still not sure why the left has such a need to cram someone's sexual preference down everyone's throats.

[Hoodat]

Yeah, she is a smug racist who advocated for violence against a woman.  I'm sure a lot of liberals laughed.  I'm sure Madonna laughed.

Yet it doesn't concern you because you only apply your standard to one side.

[Cyber Liberty]

The Kegerator is fixed?  It is a Christmas Miracle!

It was never broken!  I just needed to clean out the supply line, faucet and coupler with some solvent under pressure.  The faucet was the dirtiest part.

[Knox27]

No, and that is exactly the point. The Federal government has no right in the first place to play favorites. If this is a free country, why is there no place for Christians to be free? That's the point.

Under a federalist system - Which is what we ARE, and how we were designed, it is the business of the STATE, not the federal government. If a state wants blue laws because the citizens of that state vote for it, what business is it of anyone else? You don't like it, you are free to leave and go be where it is more to your liking...

And the science of it is in fifty experiments - If one of those experiments fail, it does not bring them all down. But experiments at the federal level do.

You do not have the right to impose your morality on me - And that is what is happening here. Left to their own devices the lion's share of the states would not condone abortion, or gay marriage. Or any of the liberal crap imposed from on high. 'On High'... THAT's authoritarian.

Christians are free to believe whatever they want and worship.  The state cannot make laws on morality, so I still do not understand what you do not like.  I legit do not understand what you feel is being imposed on you or how your free expression of religion is compromised.  No one demands you have an abortion.  no one demands you get gay married.  All i see is the attempt at restricting rights to do those things.  How is this an issue of states rights vs the federal govt?  If every person in a state believed blue cars should not be allowed on highways, i fully expect them to not get their way about it.  Basing any law on religious notions or morality is, in effect, the same as that.

[Knox27]

Yet it doesn't concern you because you only apply your standard to one side.

No, my standard is the same whoever says it, but I don't seek a voice in the operations and ideals in the democrat party.  I am not opining on a sandra bernhardt topic.  I'm opining on a board and topic where I see a wrong in the way people talk about gay folks.

[Wingnut]

Christians are free to believe whatever they want and worship.  The state cannot make laws on morality, so I still do not understand what you do not like.  I legit do not understand what you feel is being imposed on you or how your free expression of religion is compromised.  No one demands you have an abortion.  no one demands you get gay married.  All i see is the attempt at restricting rights to do those things.  How is this an issue of states rights vs the federal govt?  If every person in a state believed blue cars should not be allowed on highways, i fully expect them to not get their way about it.  Basing any law on religious notions or morality is, in effect, the same as that.

Dude.  Stop with the bullshit posts. You picked the wrong forum to play your game. 

[XenaLee]

I await with great anticipation seeing the headline:


Still not sure why the left has such a need to cram someone's sexual preference down everyone's throats.

Because... since they're going to hell.... they want to drag everyone else along with them.

[Hoodat]

No, my standard is the same whoever says it

So your standards have changed since post 60?  That didn't take long at all.

[roamer_1]

Christians are free to believe whatever they want and worship.  The state cannot make laws on morality, so I still do not understand what you do not like. 

Actually the state can impose morality... It is the feds that cannot. But the feds are. The feds have decided that homosexuality is morally acceptable. The feds teach it to our children in school. The feds promote it. The feds imposed homosexual marriage. The same with abortion. The same with loose morals - It is now easier for a woman to be single than married. Bastard children are fine and supported by the state.

ALL of that is the federal government imposing morality (or rather, the lack thereof). Federal law drives the divorce rate. Federal law drives insurance rates.

Bake the friggin cake. My business is an extension of my privacy. My right to do business hinges on my free and voluntary acceptance of a contract = I don't have to bake any damn cake I don't want to.

And you have the gall to say nothing is being imposed.

I legit do not understand what you feel is being imposed on you or how your free expression of religion is compromised.  No one demands you have an abortion.  no one demands you get gay married.  All i see is the attempt at restricting rights to do those things. 

It is not restricting rights. Those are 'rights' made of whole cloth out of thin air.

How is this an issue of states rights vs the federal govt?  If every person in a state believed blue cars should not be allowed on highways, i fully expect them to not get their way about it. 

Why? What damn business is it of yours?

Basing any law on religious notions or morality is, in effect, the same as that.

All law (or at least criminal law and civil law) is based in morality. It is in it's essence the use of coercive force to produce particular behaviors.

[Knox27]

Apologies @Knox27 if you’ve already answered this.  What does “conservative” mean to you?  Do you consider yourself conservative?

I cant imagine this is the place for all my thoughts...but...the main ones and the ones that relate to this discussion

Free enterprise and private ownership of business and property, complete freedom from religious ideals, complete freedom from any discrimination based on race, religion, ethnicity, political belief.  Core principles of the founders stemming from the enlightenment.  I believe that in an ideal world we would not need the bill of rights because it is inherent in the constitution that we already have those rights.  Shouldn't need to be enumerated, but good thing it is.  No restrictions from the govt based on morality...which means gay people have the right to marry and abortions should be legal to touch upon things in this thread.  I believe that it is incumbent on people to stand up for and fight for the rights of people and never have anything like a "tyranny of the majority"

[Hoodat]

Christians are free to believe whatever they want and worship.  The state cannot make laws on morality

Yet the state does exactly that all the time.

No one demands you have an abortion.  no one demands you get gay married.  All i see is the attempt at restricting rights to do those things.

Uh, no.  The only right being restricted here is my right to come together with my fellow society members and vote on how our society is to be shaped.  For example, if my fellow society members and I believe that private property should be valued, then we should be able to enact laws protecting private property rights.  Likewise, if we believe that human life should be valued, then we have a right under Amendment X of the US Constitution to enact laws against murder, assault, battery, etc.  And if we believe that the legal limitations under state-sanctioned marriage should be defined in a certain way (just as California did, twice), then we should have that right.  And under that form of government (as enacted by our founding fathers), I am willing to agreeably live under the guidelines chosen by my fellow society members.

Unfortunately, the Left wishes to deny us that right.  It is the Left that is restricting rights here.

[txradioguy]

The state cannot make laws on morality,

And yet it happens at every level of government every single day.

[txradioguy]

So ... two sets of standards??  Please explain how you feel that the GOP repels people. What facts are you basing that on?? Are the DEMS supposedly more accepting in your mind because they are more humanitarian-like or do you think that they may be more accepting just to garner votes, which I see as completely hypocritical and mind-controlling.

Its the typical Liberal double standard with a bit of projection tossed in for fun.

[roamer_1]

Uh, no.  The only right being restricted here is my right to come together with my fellow society members and vote on how our society is to be shaped.  For example, if my fellow society members and I believe that private property should be valued, then we should be able to enact laws protecting private property rights.  Likewise, if we believe that human life should be valued, then we have a right under Amendment X of the US Constitution to enact laws against murder, assault, battery, etc.  And if we believe that the legal limitations under state-sanctioned marriage should be defined in a certain way (just as California did, twice), then we should have that right.  And under that form of government (as enacted by our founding fathers), I am willing to agreeably live under the guidelines chosen by my fellow society members.

Unfortunately, the Left wishes to deny us that right.  It is the Left that is restricting rights here.

THAT is precisely right. 

[txradioguy]

No one demands you have an abortion.  no one demands you get gay married.

And yet the ghouls with Planned Parenthood and the gam "mafia" insist on special carve outs and "rights" for both of those things where they don't exist and aren't provided for heterosexual couples.

[Knox27]

Actually the state can impose morality... It is the feds that cannot. But the feds are. The feds have decided that homosexuality is morally acceptable. The feds teach it to our children in school. The feds promote it. The feds imposed homosexual marriage. The same with abortion. The same with loose morals - It is now easier for a woman to be single than married. Bastard children are fine and supported by the state.

ALL of that is the federal government imposing morality (or rather, the lack thereof). Federal law drives the divorce rate. Federal law drives insurance rates.

Bake the friggin cake. My business is an extension of my privacy. My right to do business hinges on my free and voluntary acceptance of a contract = I don't have to bake any damn cake I don't want to.

And you have the gall to say nothing is being imposed.

It is not restricting rights. Those are 'rights' made of whole cloth out of thin air.


Why? What damn business is it of yours?

All law (or at least criminal law and civil law) is based in morality. It is in it's essence the use of coercive force to produce particular behaviors.

The feds did not "impose" gay marriage, they stopped its restriction.  This should not have been an issue after the passage of the 14th amendment.

What is the difference between refusing to bake a cake for a gay marriage vs someone deciding not to bake a cake for an interracial marriage?

The state supporting "bastard children" is another issue.  But a woman is free to have a child without marriage if she chooses.  Freedom has its costs.

You are arguing for tyranny of the majority, but the courts and constitution are here to protect the rights of the minority, and I'm very glad they do.