:0)

Lies. Concealed carry, usually handguns. Rifles are for higher accuracy at long range.

I have a question: do they lost their way to the circus?

They are the circus

I made a crappy meme similar to this about a month ago. I bow to your awesomeness. Yours is so much better than mine.
https://i.imgflip.com/6g3o2q.jpg

Awwww man.....I'm jealous of THAT..

Really? Why? Yours so much better. Mine is too busy (which is a problem with a lot of my memes, cause I just don't know when to shut up). Thanks anyway.

Yes.

Why is it a problem that gay people can get legally married?

Why is baking a wedding cake for a soon-to-be-married couple a problem?

Why is recognizing someone in a way that they want to be recognized a problem?

Why is letting kids wear whatever they want when they dance around a problem?

And exactly what teaching plans are being used to tell kids what gender they are? When? Exactly where is this happening?

The meme literally depics why

A downward curve and a claim of slippery slope is literally not an explanation. It is, at best, an opinion.

There was a call for questions.

I asked questions.

Nope , no call. 44 other people understood

6j1lpu.jpg (click to show)

You missed the part where you said "any questions?"

You used the right punctuation for a question.

Sarcasm is lost

It's not my fault you don't know how to ask a rhetorical question.

And you still haven't answered my questions.

"Why is letting kids wear whatever they want when they dance around a problem?"

If you can't see why little boys dressed up in dresses dancing for pedophiles is not a bad thing .. well.. all I can say is your brain washing is complete.

When and where is this happening? What parents are allowing their children to hang out with pedophiles?

Do you have any evidence this is happening or is this yet another paranoid delusion being spoon-fed to you?

eat your words , you are the one living in a delusion - https://meaww.com/drag-your-kids-to-pride-event-sparks-outrage-as-videos-show-children-handing-money-to-drag-queen

Do you have any evidence that any of the performers at that show in Texas (a deeply red state) are pedos? You should get it to the police.

Also, I'd like to refer you to the OP. It clearly states "allow minors to dance for us in drag".

What shows are these kids putting on? Is the kid the star of the show? Is the kid even in a dress?

No.

Is that weird? Yes, that show in Texas is a weird, sure, but its a red state in a city run by a Republican Mayor, so weird is gonna happen.

There are pedophiles and scum of the earth on both sides of the political spectrum, the only difference is that the left is proud of it.

You're throwing accusations around but yet in your own backyard...total silence.

Clean up your own yard first.

Who on the right is celebrating this guy being a pervert? No one that is who. You lefties are the only ones that love seeing your ilk dancing half naked with children and think it is progress.

Is anyone in the Republican party calling for his removal?

Has he even been removed from his committee assignments?

No?

Oh, he's still in office? He's still holding fundraising events?

Yeah. He's doing all of that.

And you're doing nothing about it.

My position on pedophiles , no matter what side of the political spectrum they fall on, has stayed the same -should be executed-. Can you say the same thing? Or do you simply not care when the pedophiles claim to be trans?

The allegations against him are under investigation, unlike the hordes of left wing trans pedophiles dancing half naked with children while their liberal parents watch and clap.

Yes. He is being investigated.

YEt these "hordes" aren't. So... what evidence do you have of any of them being a pedo?

You should turn it over to the police. It's important.

Of course, without evidence you shouldn't be throwing that charge aroudn willy-nilly. It will give cover for real pedos. They'll say "oh, it's my political enemies out to get me."

Don't be a boy who cried wolf. Wait until you have evidence, like in Gaetz's case, to start calling people pedos.

Why don't you just say that you are okay with kids dancing with half naked men and shoving dollar bills in their g strings, and we can both move on instead of adding your ridiculous deflections.

Why don't you admit that you only label people who disagree with your politics as pedos?

Have you called out one Repubican? Even once?

Or have you "hand waved" it away and ignored it?

We both know you've never done that, not even once.

Just admit it's a label you want to use to demonize people that don't agree with you, and we can move on.

Why should anyone that has not been proven guilty be removed? There is no video evidence of his crimes like the video evidence of the crimes against children the left are committing.

I don't call people that disagree with my politics pedos, I call people who sexualize children pedos.. which they are .

Sure. And how many Republicans have you called out for doing that?

Have you called out Rep Jim Jordan for his covering up of a sex-abuse scandal when he was a coach in college?

Have you called anyone in the Republican party or someone who is a supporter a pedo?

OR have you reserved that one for anyone you think might be a democrat.

Go on, look through your comments. See what you can find.

Because I bet it's option 2 and you've never even thought about option 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02HotG9-cmk

I have a question for you: who do you think took this picture?

No, wait, I have a better question: why are you reposting nazi stuff?

Because, as far as I am aware, this picture first appeared on social media in 2018 with the caption "And then one day, for no reason at all, people voted Hitler into power" from a neo-nazi account (that was shortly deleted because, duh, nazis and weird stuff with kids).

So...why are you reposting weird Nazi stuff?

Unless you live out in the absolute middle of nowhere, I don't understand why it's so difficult to find another bakery who will bake your gay wedding cake. Find someone online who can ship your gay wedding cake to you.

I have no issue with the existence of transgender people, but there IS more to gender than just slapping on pronouns. It does require outward presentation. If someone isn't putting effort into their transition, I don't think they're sincere.

If you're in the business of making wedding cakes you don't get to discriminate who you do or don't make cakes for.

That's federal law, sport. Has been since 1964. You need to go find your high school civics teacher and apologize for not paying attention in class.

Does a business have a right to refuse service? Sure. But not using discriminatory practices. You don't get to deny customers service because they're gay, women, or even straight men. If that upsets you, then you should stop making cakes for a living.

Addressing someone the way they want to be addressed is just having manners. If you call someone Mr Smith and they stop you to say "No, it's Dr Smith" do you roll on with that Mr or do you change it?

You don't get to decide what people want to be called. Their transitions aren't subject to your approval.

The only thing you control is the level of respect you treat others with. That's it.

And you haven't been paying attention to what the Supreme Court has ruled in the matter of gay wedding cakes:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html

Tell me, what's your position on "wax my lady balls, bigot!" Do beauticians have a right to restrict their services only to women with vulvas?

And yes, your gender presentation IS subject to scrutiny from others. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species and there ARE fixed characteristics of appearance that do correspond to being a man or a woman.

"there ARE fixed characteristics of appearance that do correspond to being a man or a woman"

Like what

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_human_physiology

And that should affect a fully-clothed wedding ceremony how?

1. Marriage is between a man and a woman. That's the definition....atleast it was

2.i never really got the cake. Just bake the phqn cake.

3.yet redefining.....again. it's also stupid and annoying. You should respect someone's right to "not have to" ad much as the "right to". Simply put.....they don't have to.

4.a child performing a home erotic dance should raise flags. If someone showed you proof ,......I would hope you also disapprove

5.there is outrage of gender persuasion bc......there are teachers committing gender persuasion

The left is incapable of seeing the problem. They think this is progress. It is not. Individually they are meaningless but taken as a whole it is a decent into the destruction of our culture.

I don't are that gays can get married. However, the vastly superior solution would have been not to have the government force it on people through the Supreme Court. The left has a very bad history of using the courts to create laws (which they have no authority to do) when they cannot get something through Congress. The better solution would have been to turn 180° from tyranny and told the government to stop performing marriages altogether. Marriage is a contract between a man, a woman and God. It is a religious ceremony and it should have been returned to the churches. There are plenty of churches who would be happy to perform gay marriages and that is how that should have been handled. It is unfortunate that the left can only see giving the government more power and control over our lives.

I find it reprehensible that the government would force a baker and a photographer to provide their services to anyone. That is tyranny but the left is oblivious to that. There are thousands of bakers and photographers who would be more than willing to provide a wedding cake and take pictures. But the 1st rule of leftism is tyranny first and everything else after. More importantly why on earth would you want to force someone to your wedding who didn't want anything to do with it?

If an adult still wants to play make believe and invent genders that is their business. But remember the 1st rule of leftism. It's tyranny. New York City passed a law where you could be fined for not using a person's preferred pronoun. I think there are a few other places who have done the same thing. That is where I get upset.

It is not about letting kids dance around in drag. It is parents forcing their kids to take puberty blockers and dress in clothing of the opposite gender. That is child abuse, not LGBT rights. It is school districts going behind the parents backs and exposing transpeople to their small children. You probably think it is great but no one has the right to take parental authority away just for a political agenda.

There is no teaching plan that I am aware of but teachers, individually, have taken it as their duty to tell kids what gender they should be. That is none of their business and not their right. Nor should that ever be a part of education.

"I don't are that gays can get married. However, the vastly superior solution would have been not to have the government force it on people through the Supreme Court."

Name one person who had same sex marriage forced on them

"Marriage is a contract between a man, a woman and God. It is a religious ceremony and it should have been returned to the churches"

So non-religious couples shouldn't be allowed to get married? Is that what you're saying?

"But the 1st rule of leftism is tyranny first and everything else after"

Another bullshit lie

Non religious people can get married , by a Judge in court which would be completely Legal and non religious to suit them. Why would someone that thinks religion is a joke or stupid or doesn't believe in a God , go and want to drag their feet through a religious institution and get married by a representative of the particular religion? Some times the actions of leftists strike me as actions of people that want to insult religious people's beliefs more so than to engage in equality.

Stop being obtuse. The pushback against gay marriage isn't arguing for it to be legal-only and not religious, it's arguing for it to not exist at all. If domain over marriage was "returned to the churches" then gay people wouldn't be allowed to marry under their rules. That's what the person you're responding to is pointing out.