Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Stops Gay Marriage In Utah

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Steve_McGarrett, Jan 6, 2014.

  1. Silhouette
    Online

    Silhouette Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    21,304
    Thanks Received:
    1,441
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +6,982
    Your only warning:

    Heterosexuals don't know someone is a child predator and elevate him as their sexuality icon in spite of that knowledge. KEY difference...
     
  2. Silhouette
    Online

    Silhouette Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    21,304
    Thanks Received:
    1,441
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +6,982
    I clearly remember you said you sent one of the twins off and one remained with you. Are you sure none of those babies you shipped out were from your DNA?

    You never did say anything about that child porn LGBT advocate guy. What's your opinion. I'm curious.
     
  3. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    43,009
    Thanks Received:
    9,322
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +25,879
    And it’s this sort of ignorance that poses the greatest threat to our civil liberties.

    Same-sex couples have always had the right to access marriage law, nothing ‘new’ is being ‘created’ or ‘demanded.’ The issue involves the states denying same-sex couples the rights they’ve always possessed, in violation of the 14th Amendment.
     
  4. beagle9
    Offline

    beagle9 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,310
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +6,028
    What's a real judge to you, maybe a man that wears womens clothing under his robe or a woman that wears men's clothing under her robe ?

    Hollywood & the feds have this nation so screwed up anymore, that it isn't even funny anymore.

    People don't know who or what they are anymore, where as they have to go and ask someone or maybe get on the Dr. Phil show before all is said and done.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2014
  5. beagle9
    Offline

    beagle9 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,310
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +6,028
    So why don't you allow the states to vote then, and to have the last word on it in each state, I mean if it is such a straight foward no contest normal situation ? I know why, it's because you all know you are wrong on this, but you are going to use the feds to your advantage because of their idiocy and the infiltration that has taken place now, and you will use their judicial bullying against the will of the people in order to push your agenda on the nation without it's blessings. Classic !

    These things are not a like no matter how much you all try and make them so in the eyes of the government. Oh well, yall might as well ride the bandwagon for as long as you can I guess, because that is what has been created here.
     
  6. dcraelin
    Offline

    dcraelin VIP Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,553
    Thanks Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +334
    you are absolutely wrong on the meaning of Republic. Republic and Democracy mean the same thing. Those opposed to the constitution were the original Republicans.

    A national referendum might be challenged, but sense the only thing that gives the Constitution legitimacy is its conformity to the will of the people, it is unlikely a court challenge would work.

    Our Bill of rights was not originally in the Constitution, they are Amendments passed by a majority vote due to the will of the people.

    http://www.usmessageboard.com/membe...ture5998-jefferson-on-mtrushmore-w-quotes.jpg

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2014
  7. Flopper
    Offline

    Flopper Gold Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    17,470
    Thanks Received:
    3,110
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Washington
    Ratings:
    +6,678
    I think civil rights are the basic issue in this discussion, whether a person has the right to enter into a marriage contract with the person of their choice.
     
  8. dcraelin
    Offline

    dcraelin VIP Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,553
    Thanks Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +334
    thats right, and the courts in the south were probably worse than the people as a whole in regard to the issue.....The Supreme court itself has a pathetic history in this regard.
     
  9. Seawytch
    Offline

    Seawytch Information isnt Advocacy

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    32,398
    Thanks Received:
    4,495
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    Peaking out from the redwoods
    Ratings:
    +9,119
    Then you, clearly, need reading comprehension lessons. I never said any such thing. I've told you twice now that the twins were not mine, are not separated and both live with their sister and fathers. I was a gestational surrogate. Look it the fuck up.
     
  10. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    43,009
    Thanks Received:
    9,322
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +25,879
    Nonsense.

    The issue is solely about civil rights.

    Various state governments are seeking to deny same-sex couples their right to due process and equal protection of the law by denying them access to marriage contracts they’re eligible to enter into.

    Also nonsense is the notion that the courts ‘had their way first.’

    The people initially sought to deny same-sex couples their civil liberties by enacting measures offensive to the Constitution; same-sex couples had no other recourse than to seek relief in the Federal courts, where the courts consistently and appropriately applied established and settled 14th Amendment jurisprudence and invalidated those un-Constitutional measures.

    It’s ridiculous therefore to argue that citizens whose civil liberties have been violated should be compelled to ‘wait patiently’ in the hope that at some unknown point in the future the people will acquiesce and ‘allow’ citizens so adversely effected their civil rights, particularly when it’s not the people’s place to make such a determination in the first place.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page