Silhouette
Gold Member
- Jul 15, 2013
- 25,815
- 1,938
- 265
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy S. Moore headlined an Austin rally on Monday calling for “Biblical marriage.”
Marriage equality opponents staged the rally to show support for passage of the Preservation of Sovereignty and Marriage Act, a Republican bill which seeks to prohibit county clerks from issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples and would require Texas courts to dismiss challenges to the state's ban on gay marriage. The bill is scheduled for a hearing Wednesday.....“I'm teaching that federal courts have no authority in this area,” he said. Roy Moore Federal Courts Have No Authority To Rule On Gay Marriage Bans - On Top Magazine Gay news entertainment
****************
Well, "Biblical marriage" is nice, but it isn't going to cut it all the way. What is needed is an EXPLANATION in secular terms why the brand new type of redaction to the word "marriage" would hurt other people.
In this case, it hurts children specifically by depriving sons of fathers and daughters of mothers as a proposed institution:
A Child Can t Call 2 Women or 2 Men Mom Dad US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
In any event, the states one by one are reclaiming their sovereignty on this important matter. All they have to do is cite Windsor 2013. That is the law until further notice. They also need to insist that such a radical social experiment where kids are used as lab rats...undergoing a thing even the cult of LGBT members themselves statistically didn't have to undergo (fatherless or motherless marriages), to affect the core of all society into time unforeseen, cannot be left up to just 5 people in DC.....
...especially when two of the 5 need to recuse themselves....( Breaking Justice Kagan Must Recuse Herself From Upcoming Gay Marriage Hearing Page 51 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum )...on the question; and ALL of the Justices need to quit refusing to uphold stays that preserve THEIR OWN DECISION in Windsor 2013 until/unless further notice BY THEMSELVES AND THEMSELVES ONLY. After all, it says no less than 56 times in 26 pages of the Windsor Opinion that the question of the radical redaction of the word "marriage" is up to the discreet communities within the separate states:
Lifestyle-Marriage Equality Slugout State Authority vs Federal US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Did you know that no lower federal court below SCOTUS may overturn Windsor on the specific question of law: "whether or not the fed will bless the new radical redaction to the word "marriage" from underneath? Now you do! NONE of the lower court orders are binding to any state that has opted to defend the physical structure of the word "marriage" to incentivize fathers for sons and mothers for daughters in marriage.
Those lower circuit decisions are not worth the paper they're written on. They are procedurally-impossible. They violate federal procedural rules. The last and final word on attempting to institutionalize fatherless sons and motherless daughters "as married" was Windsor 2013. SCOTUS is the only authority that can overturn that. Even the stays they themselves denied to uphold (that they cited no merit on to the detriment of state sovereignty) are worthless. The states may do as they please. SCOTUS itself must decide if this radical new social experiment must be forced upon the states by just 5 people in DC, forever, or if the discreet communities get to weigh in on the complete upheaval of their own society.
Marriage equality opponents staged the rally to show support for passage of the Preservation of Sovereignty and Marriage Act, a Republican bill which seeks to prohibit county clerks from issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples and would require Texas courts to dismiss challenges to the state's ban on gay marriage. The bill is scheduled for a hearing Wednesday.....“I'm teaching that federal courts have no authority in this area,” he said. Roy Moore Federal Courts Have No Authority To Rule On Gay Marriage Bans - On Top Magazine Gay news entertainment
****************
Well, "Biblical marriage" is nice, but it isn't going to cut it all the way. What is needed is an EXPLANATION in secular terms why the brand new type of redaction to the word "marriage" would hurt other people.
In this case, it hurts children specifically by depriving sons of fathers and daughters of mothers as a proposed institution:
A Child Can t Call 2 Women or 2 Men Mom Dad US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
In any event, the states one by one are reclaiming their sovereignty on this important matter. All they have to do is cite Windsor 2013. That is the law until further notice. They also need to insist that such a radical social experiment where kids are used as lab rats...undergoing a thing even the cult of LGBT members themselves statistically didn't have to undergo (fatherless or motherless marriages), to affect the core of all society into time unforeseen, cannot be left up to just 5 people in DC.....
...especially when two of the 5 need to recuse themselves....( Breaking Justice Kagan Must Recuse Herself From Upcoming Gay Marriage Hearing Page 51 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum )...on the question; and ALL of the Justices need to quit refusing to uphold stays that preserve THEIR OWN DECISION in Windsor 2013 until/unless further notice BY THEMSELVES AND THEMSELVES ONLY. After all, it says no less than 56 times in 26 pages of the Windsor Opinion that the question of the radical redaction of the word "marriage" is up to the discreet communities within the separate states:
Lifestyle-Marriage Equality Slugout State Authority vs Federal US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Did you know that no lower federal court below SCOTUS may overturn Windsor on the specific question of law: "whether or not the fed will bless the new radical redaction to the word "marriage" from underneath? Now you do! NONE of the lower court orders are binding to any state that has opted to defend the physical structure of the word "marriage" to incentivize fathers for sons and mothers for daughters in marriage.
Those lower circuit decisions are not worth the paper they're written on. They are procedurally-impossible. They violate federal procedural rules. The last and final word on attempting to institutionalize fatherless sons and motherless daughters "as married" was Windsor 2013. SCOTUS is the only authority that can overturn that. Even the stays they themselves denied to uphold (that they cited no merit on to the detriment of state sovereignty) are worthless. The states may do as they please. SCOTUS itself must decide if this radical new social experiment must be forced upon the states by just 5 people in DC, forever, or if the discreet communities get to weigh in on the complete upheaval of their own society.
Last edited:
