City governments should be sued for every dime lost and spent tying up city streets, and providing security, for a "parade" exclusively promoting perversion. Pro-lifers and religious groups should demand to have floats and presence in all parades, and sue for Conspiracy Against Rights if refused.
To: LevonRiver
RE:”
City governments should be sued for every dime lost and spent tying up city streets, and providing security, for a “parade” exclusively promoting perversion. Pro-lifers and religious groups should demand to have floats and presence in all parades, and sue for Conspiracy Against Rights if refused.” Wouldn't last 5 minutes in court.
Next!
2 posted on
06/13/2018 7:38:52 AM PDT by
sickoflibs
('Equal protection' only applies to illegals not you!)
To: LevonRiver
Actually, there is no “right” to engage in homosexual acts.
Homosexuality was generally illegal among all the several States that Ratified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Therefore engaging in homosexual acts CANNOT be among the Privileges and Immunities in A4:S2:C1 nor can it be among the other rights retained in the 9th Amendment (since being illegal they were clearly not retained at the time).
Homosexual act should never have been legalized.
They should once again be criminalized.
3 posted on
06/13/2018 7:47:58 AM PDT by
Rurudyne
(Standup Philosopher)
To: LevonRiver
Good luck with that, whether it’s the logical thing to do or not. Logic and reason matter a lot less these days, compared to the past.
To: LevonRiver
5 posted on
06/13/2018 7:52:35 AM PDT by
Lurkinanloomin
(Natural Born Citizen Means Born Here of Citizen Parents__Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam, Know Peace)
To: LevonRiver
7 posted on
06/13/2018 7:56:43 AM PDT by
DungeonMaster
(...the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light...)
To: LevonRiver
8 posted on
06/13/2018 7:58:57 AM PDT by
AppyPappy
(Don't mistake your dorm political discussions with the desires of the nation)
To: LevonRiver
I call them “AIDS Pride” parades, because that is exactly what they are.
Never, EVER let them forget the public health damage they have caused.
9 posted on
06/13/2018 8:06:07 AM PDT by
fwdude
(History has no 'sides;' you're thinking of geometry.)
To: LevonRiver
This seems far fetched, but unless we go on the unmistakable offensive, instead of cowering in our own defensive “religious freedom” protection closets, we won’t make any real headway.
12 posted on
06/13/2018 8:10:31 AM PDT by
fwdude
(History has no 'sides;' you're thinking of geometry.)
To: LevonRiver
I don’t think this would go anywhere. Any group can petition to have a public march or protest, and saying no just gets you tied-up in the thorny thicket of First Amendment litigation.
Once they have a permit security and public safety must be provided. Cities really don’t have an option here.
To: LevonRiver
If economic/participant feasibility were the deciding factor in my large, relatively conservative big Texas city, the haughtiness parade would have on its own years ago. Here's the sparsely attended nothing-burger from last year.
15 posted on
06/13/2018 8:37:30 AM PDT by
fwdude
(History has no 'sides;' you're thinking of geometry.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson