A Simple Question For Those Still Opposed to Same Sex Marriage

[Syriusly]

Except that nagging issue of the gay marriage contract banishing children for life from.

Except that nagging issue of Silhouette spamming the same lie over and over.

No marriage contract bans children from anything.

 

[Syriusly]

They can be married

/thread

They legalize gay marriage and it is still not enough. They must still convince every person on the planet it is OK..

No- just convince the bigots not to discriminate against them.

 

[Silhouette]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

So according to you, Obergefell removed fathers as vital to sons and mothers as vital as vital to daughters?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

So according to you, Obergefell removed fathers as vital to sons and mothers as vital as vital to daughters?

No . Social Science researchers did


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Syriusly]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

So according to you, Obergefell removed fathers as vital to sons and mothers as vital as vital to daughters?

So according to you, Obergefell requires families to kick puppies?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

The Constitution is the highest authority in this country, not the Supreme Court.

In each and every one of the many instances in which the Supreme Court has “interpreted” the Constitution to mean something different from and irreconcilable with what is actually written in the Constitution, the court has acted illegally.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

The Constitution is the highest authority in this country, not the Supreme Court.

In each and every one of the many instances in which the Supreme Court has “interpreted” the Constitution to mean something different from and irreconcilable with what is actually written in the Constitution, the court has acted illegally.

The SCOTUS interprets and enforces the Constitution


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Syriusly]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

The Constitution is the highest authority in this country, not the Supreme Court.y.

And the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution- and protects all of us from unconstitutional laws passed by the Federal government or the State governments.

Which is why the Supreme Court is able to overturn not only unconstitutional state marriage laws- but also unconstitutional state gun laws.

 

[Syriusly]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

In each and every one of the many instances in which the Supreme Court has “interpreted” the Constitution to mean something different from and irreconcilable with what is actually written in the Constitution, the court has acted illegally.

Literally legally impossible for the Supreme Court to make an illegal ruling.

Despite what the butthurt snowflakes say everytime they disagree with the Supreme Court- but oddly enough never when they agree with the Supreme Court.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

The Constitution is the highest authority in this country, not the Supreme Court.y.

And the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution- and protects all of us from unconstitutional laws passed by the Federal government or the State governments.

Which is why the Supreme Court is able to overturn not only unconstitutional state marriage laws- but also unconstitutional state gun laws.

“You seem to consider the federal judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions, a very dangerous doctrine, indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have with others the same passions for the party, for power and the privilege of the corps. Their power is the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.” — Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to William Charles Jarvis (1820)​

 

[Silhouette]

Yep. Separation of powers was most clearly violated by 2015's judicial oligarchy. Their "interpretation of the 14th Amendment" reads like a kindergartener's wishful thinking.

 

[Syriusly]

It is impossible for the Supreme Court to settle anything illegally.

Literally legally impossible.

The Constitution is the highest authority in this country, not the Supreme Court.y.

And the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution- and protects all of us from unconstitutional laws passed by the Federal government or the State governments.

Which is why the Supreme Court is able to overturn not only unconstitutional state marriage laws- but also unconstitutional state gun laws.

“You seem to consider the federal judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions, a very dangerous doctrine, indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have with others the same passions for the party, for power and the privilege of the corps. Their power is the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.” — Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to William Charles Jarvis (1820)​

LOL- Jefferson was still pissed off about Marbury v. Madison.

 

[Syriusly]

Yep. Separation of powers was most clearly violated by 2015's judicial oligarchy. Their "interpretation of the 14th Amendment" reads like a kindergartener's wishful thinking.

Says the idiot who has repeatedly told us that race, gender and religion are mentioned in the 14th Amendment.

LOL

 

[Silhouette]

Then why are other sexual kink intimacies still denied marriage if no persons shall be denied the same privileges as another has? And please don't tell us it's because the majority objects. Gay marriage is still illegal in CA's Constitution because the majority there has always objected to it.

 

[Syriusly]

Then why are other sexual kink intimacies still denied marriage .

'kink's cannot marry.

People can marry.

 

[Silhouette]

Then why are other sexual kink intimacies still denied marriage .

'kink's cannot marry.

People can marry.

Sooooo....

polyamorist-Americans can marry?

 

[Syriusly]

Then why are other sexual kink intimacies still denied marriage .

'kink's cannot marry.

People can marry.

Sooooo....

polyamorist-Americans can marry?

Sure they can. Any two polyamorist Americans can marry.

Now if you want to go marry your sister wives- the law says you can't- but you can of course go to court to demand the 'right' to marry your sister wives.

Go for it.

 

[Silhouette]

Well polamory is one or more people attracted to multiple people so your terms of two are oppressive to their sexual orientation.