No he is.

He can tell these Senators are only voting against the same sex portion. They aren't really racist and voting against interracial marriage! These are some good Christian people by gawd! And they would never do that. They will commit crimes, cheat on their spouses, take huge donations that influence their vote, vote against veterans needs, but enrich themselves on the current military industrial complex (that's where the money is, not helping vets).

But racism? That is where they draw the line and /u/Heil_Hipster knows it!

[deleted]

https://imgur.com/a/aFWrGKt

I’ll gladly put mine on the line if you’ll stop talking out of yours.

Edited to add: “I have serious concerns about what this law would mean for the religious liberty rights of Americans who hold traditional, religious views on marriage.”

Straight from his mouth, in case you didn’t feel like reading.

depends. after the court date, it’s normally 30 days. last time i saw the situation happen, the eviction was served and court was a week-2 after that date, then they had to be out within 30 days.

The divorce courts are already clogged. If people choose to go through a church or other religious institution to sanctify their marriage, let them. I don't see why I have to seek the crowns approval and why I have to pay them for a permit. People also sue to protect their interests as is. People need to be accountable for their actions, we can't advocate for govt to solve all problems as that gives govt the power to cause a lot of problems.

I mean, he is describing an extremely common tactic in Congress. There isn't any clairvoyance required to see it.

/r/fuckjoshhawley

Architect on E Republic road! It’s a super cute space, and has the nicest people who work there. I’ve been in so much they remember my name and all know me.🤣 Its where Hebrews coffee was!

My wife goes to Vintage Peddler to get wax melts and things from a booth in there and they have this.

Treasonous POS

Right?

Everytime. EVERY-FUCKING-SINGLE-TIME I read shit like this I wonder why people don't look at the bill being proposed? It's readily available as /u/ladnar016 pointed out.

Then I remember the poor of an excuse of an education system that allows anyone with a pulse to graduate - because if the schools numbers are bad with testing and graduation rates, the government withholds funding to those schools (like less money is going to help attract better teachers and supplies needed to better a child's education, but I digress)

And so the education system produces poorly equipped adults, and they are ill-equipped to properly think for themselves. They are easily manipulated and brainwashed by whatever inept conman is placed in front of them - especially via television.

Then I realize this failure of society produces rubes like you.

No. I don't know this for sure. I suppose I like to assume the best about people.

Except this bill doesn't force religious institutions to perform any such service. This is about legally recognizing these marriages.

​

From the text of the bill:

SEC. 6. NO IMPACT ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND CONSCIENCE.

...

(b) Goods Or Services.—Consistent with the First Amendment to the Constitution, nonprofit religious organizations, including churches, mosques, synagogues, temples, nondenominational ministries, interdenominational and ecumenical organizations, mission organizations, faith-based social agencies, religious educational institutions, and nonprofit entities whose principal purpose is the study, practice, or advancement of religion, and any employee of such an organization, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage. Any refusal under this subsection to provide such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges shall not create any civil claim or cause of action.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8404/text

because it was already in the language of the bill that religious organizations don't have to recognize them. As in, the very bill they voted against already had a religious exemption in it

So you are fully in-the-know of all Republicans and what they mean when they vote for or against a bill? You must be clairvoyant.

No stress! That is so wild though, sorry you had to deal with that. It feels like Springfield and even Joplin have an inordinate amount of empty buildings. I know not all of them are fit to be offices, and the ones that are can be incredibly unaffordable. But I do get confused every time a new one pops up because it's just like ..let's fill the holes we have! And I don't understand why that's happening. But it took your company two years to find a fit, and that's no small thing either, so there must be legitimate reasons they all sit empty.

Sorry. I updated my original comment, but didn’t think to post a separate one.

Tito is back home after his adventure. Thanks for asking!

I wasn't trying to "well, ackshually" you, btw. It's just fresh for me, as we just spent almost two years looking for new offices at work.

They voted against forcing churches to perform them. I thought we were supposed to honor the separation between church and state.

That depends on a lot of factors. Has the eviction already gone through the courts?

A friend does boudoir shoots, when she gets enough requests she books a hotel room and then schedules out her clients throughout the day/night.

They probably did. It's just that whoever made this little infographic didn't mention that because it would make the Republicans not look so bad. The intention behind this is to make Republicans look bad. That's the same reason they included the interracial marriage part in this bill. It puts Republicans in a position where if they vote no on the bill, they can say that they voted against interracial marriage even though the Republicans were more than likely actually voting against gay marriage, which is bad still but is not received as badly as voting against interracial marriage.

I was close

Sure technically. But he was Voting against same-sex marriage, not interracial marriage. Interracial marriage was just included on the same bill so that people who voted against it looked bad and could be accused of voting against interracial marriage. For the record, I think both should obviously be legal. I'm not saying it's cool to vote against gay marriage. I'm just telling you what is most likely really happening here. Those are both proposed in the same bill so if you vote against one, you vote against the other