@NewRockstars@eavoss@lulu_clemons 2/2
”There is spoken of in time lost lores
of the Seven Rings of Raggadorr,
Its by them I ask,
Nay I implore
That all be as it was before.
Strange was using an amped up version of the Rings of Ragadorr to reconstruct his universe.
@NewRockstars@eavoss@lulu_clemons Its impossible to message you but in your YouTube video of the season finale of season 2 What IF you asked why the rings at the center of the forge.
You only need to look at Doctor Strange Sorcerer Supreme issue 2 to see Clea saying before the broken Orb of Agamotto: 1/2
@flanders_andrew@BrandiKruse ANTIFA and MAGAhats are very similar. ANTIFA is just a rebranding by the old school Anarchists. MAGAhats are a cult of low empathy/intelligence followers of a narcissistic sociopath easily provoked by any lie that justifies their actions.
@Franklin_Graham It was a sheet cake without adornment other than frosting which the business agreed to make until it found out its usage.
Can a business refuse to sell for if a customer plans on a superstitious usage? That would exclude all church.
@vonToddenstein@breathfart@CarmineSabia So you are saying the federal government shouldn’t recognize marriage? That is a major change that I don’t think you have really thought out.
@johnplayer_1 @nytimes Thanks for confirming you haven’t a clue what Christianity is. You can cry ‘Lord, Lord’ all you want, God has said that’s a hallmark of the fallen.
@ADFLegal@ryanlbangert There is no 'constitutional freedom' to ignore the constitutional freedoms of others. You think YOU can't marry someone of the same séx, that's fine. But regardless of your beliefs other people do marry them just fine.
@CollinRugg yeah, pointing out the bully in the room is 'getting nervous'. I bet you were the bully or cheered the bullies on when you were in school, right?
@iamhbomb@nytimes You are confusing the religious rite of marriage with the secular civil contract of the same name. No one must religiously solemnize a marriage. This is only about a the 100% secular civil contract and nothing to do with any church's religious practices.
@berniecolon76@nytimes As a matter of fact it will. For decades show that married couples as a rule take less from society and give more back to it. A two person economic platform is more stable than two individual ones.
@Michaelbr1987@nytimes This bill only covers the 100% secular civil contract licensed by states, it has nothing to do with your's or anyone else's religion. Shoot, nuns all religiously marry the same dead guy - no secular law being broken.
@MisterJamesBode@nytimes Which was an unconstitutional law. Marriage is a state-licensed civil contract and the federal constitution says it can not ignore a contract. The attempt to make them ignored is what got it ruled unconstitutional.
@NBCOUT What’s wrong with reporters theses days? A bakery owner is challenging the ruling, the ruling was against the bakery. No particular person at the bakery is compelled to handle the order.
It’s bad reporting like this that muddied up the previous case.
@tomselliott@Check_ur_source@DavidAFrench Done. Your interpretation was the losing one, it’s proponents wanted explicit language saying what you advocate - it doesn’t.