News thread

[JatoTheRipper]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

How does one differentiate between a religious and non-religious person when shopping for a product/service?

And, since not all religious people care about gay marriage, how does one differentiate between those that do and those that don't?

Probably when the baker tells them they don't want to make the cake because it goes against what they believe.

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by JatoTheRipper

Probably when the baker tells them they don't want to make the cake because it goes against what they believe.

You know you can't do that, right?

[MrBlank]

https://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/cop...unal-1.3989207

- Local cops essentially rat themselves out

[JatoTheRipper]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

You know you can't do that, right?

Are you sure about that? The Supreme Court decided it was fine in this case.

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by JatoTheRipper

Are you sure about that? The Supreme Court decided it was fine in this case.

Previous to that case.

It's laid out fairly plainly in the Constitution.

[JatoTheRipper]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

Previous to that case.

It's laid out fairly plainly in the Constitution.

Well we were talking about this case.

And this isn't the first time law makers don't follow the Constitution...

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by JatoTheRipper

Well we were talking about this case.

And this isn't the first time law makers don't follow the Constitution...

The Constitution was made to be changed. This is how it happens.

[JatoTheRipper]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

The Constitution was made to be changed. This is how it happens.

Yes, with amendments. But the constitution, as it stands, isn't always followed even without amendments.

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by JatoTheRipper

Yes, with amendments. But the constitution, as it stands, isn't always followed even without amendments.

True. As with most things, interpretation rules the day.

[bbrigg]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

Apart from getting NK to sit down and talk, nothing comes to mind.

That says more about your mind than it does about Trump.

Sent from my LG-H870DS using Tapatalk

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by bbrigg

That says more about your mind than it does about Trump.

Sent from my LG-H870DS using Tapatalk

Why you trollin', bruh? Didn't we already cover this?

[Mike Flea]

Testing the waters or pushing his luck... just like all the others

[JatoTheRipper]

The new group of retards arises. I present you with Abolish ICE.

A country without borders isn't a country. If you want to help immigrants so much go ****ing live with them instead of trying to make me pay for their free ride.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...vement-695582/

[Duuuuuuuude]

Yeah, that's silly.

[JatoTheRipper]

Here's another judge that's completely against personal responsibility. When will this end?

He said Tennessee can't revoke driver's licenses when said driver is too poor to pay fines because it violates their Constitutional right. Odd, I don't remember driver's licenses being protected uder the Constitution.

https://jalopnik.com/tennessee-cant-...who-1827363132

[BigSki]

A drivers license is a privilege, how in the F can the liberal retardation go that far ??

[Duuuuuuuude]

It's a reasonable judgement IMO. I know firsthand the court fee shit spiral that happens when you're poor.

Backing it up with the 14th Ammendment seems to be a stretch though. It might be something specific to the states Constitution...

[JatoTheRipper]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

It's a reasonable judgement IMO. I know firsthand the court fee shit spiral that happens when you're poor.

Backing it up with the 14th Ammendment seems to be a stretch though. It might be something specific to the states Constitution...

It's not reasonable. It's insanity. Driving is a privilege with responsibilities.
If you can't meet the responsibilities then walk! What's next? They can't pay for insurance, but it's fine to drive anyway?

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by JatoTheRipper

It's not reasonable. It's insanity. Driving is a privilege with responsibilities.
If you can't meet the responsibilities then walk! What's next? They can't pay for insurance, but it's fine to drive anyway?

Did you even read the article that you posted or the link therein to the original story, or are you just raging on the headline and letting your imagination get the best of you?

Further financial crippling of the already financially crippled does nothing to serve society and places additional burden on society as a whole.

Any loss of mobility is a total game changer and massive setback when you are trying to scrape your way out of poverty. Getting a ticket for something stupid or minor is a huge expense. Even taking time off to go to court can be a big hit in the paycheck. If you can't afford to pay the fine, you lose your licence. Much of the time, that loss of licence results in a lost job, and fewer replacement job opportunities. That can cascade into something catastrophic. Some leniency there will keep people working, paying rent, supporting their families, and paying taxes.

Or, you can squeeze them hard and hope that they don't suck up too much of your tax dollars when they have to go back on public assistance.

That's not to say that such leniency shouldn't get out of hand, because it shouldn't.

A better way would be to scale fines in accordance with income.

[JatoTheRipper]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

Did you even read the article that you posted or the link therein to the original story, or are you just raging on the headline and letting your imagination get the best of you?

Further financial crippling of the already financially crippled does nothing to serve society and places additional burden on society as a whole.

Any loss of mobility is a total game changer and massive setback when you are trying to scrape your way out of poverty. Getting a ticket for something stupid or minor is a huge expense. Even taking time off to go to court can be a big hit in the paycheck. If you can't afford to pay the fine, you lose your licence. Much of the time, that loss of licence results in a lost job, and fewer replacement job opportunities. That can cascade into something catastrophic. Some leniency there will keep people working, paying rent, supporting their families, and paying taxes.

Or, you can squeeze them hard and hope that they don't suck up too much of your tax dollars when they have to go back on public assistance.

That's not to say that such leniency shouldn't get out of hand, because it shouldn't.

A better way would be to scale fines in accordance with income.

Yeah I read the article. Why should we dismiss fines because somebody is poor? That's discrimination against people that aren't poor. And it means the poor can do whatever they want without risking the loss of their license. It's bullshit.

Being poor is a choice. If they can't afford the tickets they should start driving better, stop making traffic offenses, and/or get a second job to pay the tickets.