Might as well misogynyFollow

For example a bakery should be able to refuse to make a cake for a homosexual couple because to make that cake would be a violation of their religious beliefs.

But if a Democrat kicks someone out because of their own ideology it's wrong. Your argument doesn't even have weight to crush itself under.

I must have missed the part of the bible that disallows making cakes for the gays.

Iceland had an organic uprising which replaced their government in '09

Burma is, was and will be a site for organic uprisings.

Yeah, I guess. Iceland was closer to a vote of no confidence than a revolution, but sure. Burma is barely a nation state. If there was much worth fighting over, a larger player would make it a proxy state. India, most likely, that may be happening regardless.

Book of Gluten. Chapter 12, verse 5.

That's an absurd position to take since it's applicable to just about every topic one can think of. Not every person holds the same beliefs on when and how capital punishment should be executed, how and when an abortion can take place, who and how people should be granted legal residency/citizenship, etc.

NO GUNS is in direct violation of the 2nd amendment. So unless you are actually seriously advocating for a repeal of the 2nd amendment, supporting, praising, or even suggesting this as an option is moronic and a complete waste of everyone's time.

Which is presumably what he was talking about. There's a massive excluded middle where the only options are no guns and more guns. There is literally no one in opposition to creating regulation that can prevent truly disturbed people from being able to obtain guns (that would be the "less guns" option). The problem is that anytime this is suggested the "no guns!" crowd can't help by push for restrictions that apply to everyone, or slip in their own pet gun control, and thus ensures that the other side opposes it.

The saddest part is that I'm quite sure that the "no guns!" crowd does this purely for the political advantage it gets them. They know nothing will come of it, but by proposing tough gun control (while claiming they're just trying to prevent the last crazy guy's gun spree), they get to make their base happy, and drum up support by demonizing those "evil gun owners who want to help mentally disturbed people own guns!". It's a political fabrication, but in the meantime nothing actually gets done that addresses the real problem at hand.

Heaven forbid someone actually propose a clean and workable piece of legislation that actually addresses the health care concerns at hand rather than over extending it into a broad attack on the 2nd amendment. Because we can't do something that might actually work, right?