Four Supreme Court Justices Summarize How June's Gay-Marriage Decision Was Improper/Illegal

[Pop23]

Unbelievable, the federal government has USURPED powers via, amongst others, the "Patriot" and CISA Acts.

But the narcotizized want to dwell on the gay-marriage issue. UNfuckingbelievable.

There is no gay marriage issue dude.

So 1782 posts wasted discussing a non-issue.


.

Maybe. Find a statute that created gay marriage. There are none. What the Supreme Court ruled as legal is Same Sex Marriage, which is quite different in scope.

Marriage law does not include Love, sex or much other for these contracts to be valid.

The implication is massive. Get a 35 dollar license and lessen your tax load, pay no inheritance tax, less health insurance cost, survivors SSI and pension coverage. The economic damage could be severe, to tax roles, insurance companies and unioun and private pension plans.

And, since there are no real qualifications, the two parties, no matter sequality, can keep dating members of the opposite sex (who might also be married).

There is no downside.

By marketing this as "gay" marriage, they got the media and courts looking the other way.

Object and you were a homophobic bigot. And no media type or Judge wants that.

Perfectly executed marketing.

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

 

[Faun]

Repeating that doesn't help you. You don't understand marriage laws regarding gender were affected by Supreme Court rulings. You keep saying the law is still in effect as written, but you can't prove it. Instead, you knocked yourself out by pointing out what happens to clerks who don't follow the law. They go to jail. More evidence you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about since the Polk County clerk did not go to jail.

Thanks again for that, btw.

Your red herring arguments are amusing.

I supplied the law. You have supplied nothing to support your own position.

Clerks don't go to jail for obeying state law.

Of course, maybe nazi's like you think they should?

No, i think clerks who don't follow the law, like Kim Davis, should go to jail. Meanwhile, no clerks in Iowa have been jailed for not following the law because they are following the law. Yet more evidence you don't have a fucking clue about that of which you speak.

No, you think clerks who don't behave the way you have deemed "moral" should be jailed. I have yet to see you call for the jailing of all the clerks who issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples in violation of the existing laws prior to the Supreme Court's fiat.

Now you're making shit up. I've never been in favor of any clerk giving out marriage licenses in violation of the law.

They would have to be in violation of the law, which Faun thinks is same sex family marriage in Iowa, which according to the National District Attorney's Association is false.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Sorry Faun, you look the fool now. Not that you didn't all along

Oh, look... the forum pervert talking about incest again.

Is there a thread you don't talk about incest?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

There is no gay marriage issue dude.

So 1782 posts wasted discussing a non-issue.


.

Maybe. Find a statute that created gay marriage. There are none. What the Supreme Court ruled as legal is Same Sex Marriage, which is quite different in scope.

Marriage law does not include Love, sex or much other for these contracts to be valid.

The implication is massive. Get a 35 dollar license and lessen your tax load, pay no inheritance tax, less health insurance cost, survivors SSI and pension coverage. The economic damage could be severe, to tax roles, insurance companies and unioun and private pension plans.

And, since there are no real qualifications, the two parties, no matter sequality, can keep dating members of the opposite sex (who might also be married).

There is no downside.

By marketing this as "gay" marriage, they got the media and courts looking the other way.

Object and you were a homophobic bigot. And no media type or Judge wants that.

Perfectly executed marketing.

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Horseshit! The law takes into consideration all aspects of the human condition as did Kennedy's opinion. Read Obergefell bubba. If you have ice water in your veins, it not my problem

 

[Pop23]

Your red herring arguments are amusing.

I supplied the law. You have supplied nothing to support your own position.

Clerks don't go to jail for obeying state law.

Of course, maybe nazi's like you think they should?

No, i think clerks who don't follow the law, like Kim Davis, should go to jail. Meanwhile, no clerks in Iowa have been jailed for not following the law because they are following the law. Yet more evidence you don't have a fucking clue about that of which you speak.

Polk county does not control the state.

According to you. County overrules state, then I guess State would overrule Federal.

You come up with the statute or ISC ruling that makes same sex sibling marriage illegal yet?

Neither does Kim Davis, yet she went to jail for not following the law. Clearly, by denying marriage licenses to family members, Polk County is following the law.

Hey boob, did you read the second page of the application to Marry.

Might want to check it out. Seems to say that those that are too closely related are listed in Iowa 595.

Hmmmmmm

And this:

Iowa Annulment and Prohibited Marriage Laws - FindLaw

Bye Bye Bi Guy!

I see no marriage application at that link.

I did find it here, however. ..

http://forms.gmdsolutions.com/recorder/marriage_application.pdf

.... and the only reference to 595 is:

Pursuant to Iowa Code section 595.3A, the laws of this state affirm a party’s right to enter into this marriage and at the same time
to live within the marriage under the full protection of the laws of this state with regard to violence and abuse. Neither party to the marriage is the property of the other. Assault, sexual abuse, and willful injury of a spouse or other family member are violations of the laws of this state and are punishable by the state.

• Applicants’ social security numbers are collected pursuant to Iowa Code section 595.4 and 42 USC 405(c)(2), as amended by Section 1090(b) of Public Law 105-34. The law authorizes the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to use social security numbers for determining Earned Income Tax Credit compliance on income tax returns and to authorize the State Registrar to report the social security number to the Child Support Recovery Unit.​

Why are you misrepresenting the contents of Iowa's marriage application?

You highlighted 595.3a then ignore it?

Here is a link to the explanation of 595.3A by the National District Attorney's Association.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Sorry dude, they seem to have a VERY DIFFERENT opinion to yours. But then they are educated in the field. You're not.

 

[Faun]

There is no gay marriage issue dude.

So 1782 posts wasted discussing a non-issue.


.

Maybe. Find a statute that created gay marriage. There are none. What the Supreme Court ruled as legal is Same Sex Marriage, which is quite different in scope.

Marriage law does not include Love, sex or much other for these contracts to be valid.

The implication is massive. Get a 35 dollar license and lessen your tax load, pay no inheritance tax, less health insurance cost, survivors SSI and pension coverage. The economic damage could be severe, to tax roles, insurance companies and unioun and private pension plans.

And, since there are no real qualifications, the two parties, no matter sequality, can keep dating members of the opposite sex (who might also be married).

There is no downside.

By marketing this as "gay" marriage, they got the media and courts looking the other way.

Object and you were a homophobic bigot. And no media type or Judge wants that.

Perfectly executed marketing.

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Iowa doesn't give marriage licenses to immediate family members.

(3) not closely related by blood or first cousins.​

Gender is not a factor.

 

[Pop23]

So 1782 posts wasted discussing a non-issue.


.

Maybe. Find a statute that created gay marriage. There are none. What the Supreme Court ruled as legal is Same Sex Marriage, which is quite different in scope.

Marriage law does not include Love, sex or much other for these contracts to be valid.

The implication is massive. Get a 35 dollar license and lessen your tax load, pay no inheritance tax, less health insurance cost, survivors SSI and pension coverage. The economic damage could be severe, to tax roles, insurance companies and unioun and private pension plans.

And, since there are no real qualifications, the two parties, no matter sequality, can keep dating members of the opposite sex (who might also be married).

There is no downside.

By marketing this as "gay" marriage, they got the media and courts looking the other way.

Object and you were a homophobic bigot. And no media type or Judge wants that.

Perfectly executed marketing.

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Horseshit! The law takes into consideration all aspects of the human condition as did Kennedy's opinion. Read Obergefell bubba. If you have ice water in your veins, it not my problem

God how I wish what you were saying was true. But it's not buttwipe.

If it were the state could qualify what marital love was, and you'd lose.

 

[Faun]

No, i think clerks who don't follow the law, like Kim Davis, should go to jail. Meanwhile, no clerks in Iowa have been jailed for not following the law because they are following the law. Yet more evidence you don't have a fucking clue about that of which you speak.

Polk county does not control the state.

According to you. County overrules state, then I guess State would overrule Federal.

You come up with the statute or ISC ruling that makes same sex sibling marriage illegal yet?

Neither does Kim Davis, yet she went to jail for not following the law. Clearly, by denying marriage licenses to family members, Polk County is following the law.

Hey boob, did you read the second page of the application to Marry.

Might want to check it out. Seems to say that those that are too closely related are listed in Iowa 595.

Hmmmmmm

And this:

Iowa Annulment and Prohibited Marriage Laws - FindLaw

Bye Bye Bi Guy!

I see no marriage application at that link.

I did find it here, however. ..

http://forms.gmdsolutions.com/recorder/marriage_application.pdf

.... and the only reference to 595 is:

Pursuant to Iowa Code section 595.3A, the laws of this state affirm a party’s right to enter into this marriage and at the same time
to live within the marriage under the full protection of the laws of this state with regard to violence and abuse. Neither party to the marriage is the property of the other. Assault, sexual abuse, and willful injury of a spouse or other family member are violations of the laws of this state and are punishable by the state.

• Applicants’ social security numbers are collected pursuant to Iowa Code section 595.4 and 42 USC 405(c)(2), as amended by Section 1090(b) of Public Law 105-34. The law authorizes the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to use social security numbers for determining Earned Income Tax Credit compliance on income tax returns and to authorize the State Registrar to report the social security number to the Child Support Recovery Unit.​

Why are you misrepresenting the contents of Iowa's marriage application?

You highlighted 595.3a then ignore it?

Here is a link to the explanation of 595.3A by the National District Attorney's Association.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Sorry dude, they seem to have a VERY DIFFERENT opinion to yours. But then they are educated in the field. You're not.

I see nothing in your link addressing 595.3A.

Here is 595.3A and I see nothing in there about close family members

595.3A APPLICATION FORM AND LICENSE -- ABUSE PREVENTION LANGUAGE. In addition to any other information contained in an application form for a marriage license and a marriage license, the application form and license shall contain the following statement in bold print:

"THE LAWS OF THIS STATE AFFIRM YOUR RIGHT TO ENTER INTO THIS MARRIAGE AND AT THE SAME TIME TO LIVE WITHIN THE MARRIAGE UNDER THE FULL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS OF THIS STATE WITH REGARD TO VIOLENCE AND ABUSE. Neither of you is the property of the other. Assault, sexual abuse, and willful injury of a spouse or other family member are violations of the laws of this state and are punishable by the state."​

 

[Pop23]

So 1782 posts wasted discussing a non-issue.


.

Maybe. Find a statute that created gay marriage. There are none. What the Supreme Court ruled as legal is Same Sex Marriage, which is quite different in scope.

Marriage law does not include Love, sex or much other for these contracts to be valid.

The implication is massive. Get a 35 dollar license and lessen your tax load, pay no inheritance tax, less health insurance cost, survivors SSI and pension coverage. The economic damage could be severe, to tax roles, insurance companies and unioun and private pension plans.

And, since there are no real qualifications, the two parties, no matter sequality, can keep dating members of the opposite sex (who might also be married).

There is no downside.

By marketing this as "gay" marriage, they got the media and courts looking the other way.

Object and you were a homophobic bigot. And no media type or Judge wants that.

Perfectly executed marketing.

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Iowa doesn't give marriage licenses to immediate family members.

(3) not closely related by blood or first cousins.​

Gender is not a factor.

Are you an attorney? No?

then these guys know much, much more than you.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Guess you lose again

You're on a roll imbecile

 

[Faun]

Maybe. Find a statute that created gay marriage. There are none. What the Supreme Court ruled as legal is Same Sex Marriage, which is quite different in scope.

Marriage law does not include Love, sex or much other for these contracts to be valid.

The implication is massive. Get a 35 dollar license and lessen your tax load, pay no inheritance tax, less health insurance cost, survivors SSI and pension coverage. The economic damage could be severe, to tax roles, insurance companies and unioun and private pension plans.

And, since there are no real qualifications, the two parties, no matter sequality, can keep dating members of the opposite sex (who might also be married).

There is no downside.

By marketing this as "gay" marriage, they got the media and courts looking the other way.

Object and you were a homophobic bigot. And no media type or Judge wants that.

Perfectly executed marketing.

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Horseshit! The law takes into consideration all aspects of the human condition as did Kennedy's opinion. Read Obergefell bubba. If you have ice water in your veins, it not my problem

God how I wish what you were saying was true. But it's not buttwipe.

If it were the state could qualify what marital love was, and you'd lose.

Why do you think marriage is a fundamental right?

 

[Pop23]

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Horseshit! The law takes into consideration all aspects of the human condition as did Kennedy's opinion. Read Obergefell bubba. If you have ice water in your veins, it not my problem

God how I wish what you were saying was true. But it's not buttwipe.

If it were the state could qualify what marital love was, and you'd lose.

Why do you think marriage is a fundamental right?

I don't. But that's what the USSC said it was, so I'm stuck with that

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Maybe. Find a statute that created gay marriage. There are none. What the Supreme Court ruled as legal is Same Sex Marriage, which is quite different in scope.

Marriage law does not include Love, sex or much other for these contracts to be valid.

The implication is massive. Get a 35 dollar license and lessen your tax load, pay no inheritance tax, less health insurance cost, survivors SSI and pension coverage. The economic damage could be severe, to tax roles, insurance companies and unioun and private pension plans.

And, since there are no real qualifications, the two parties, no matter sequality, can keep dating members of the opposite sex (who might also be married).

There is no downside.

By marketing this as "gay" marriage, they got the media and courts looking the other way.

Object and you were a homophobic bigot. And no media type or Judge wants that.

Perfectly executed marketing.

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Horseshit! The law takes into consideration all aspects of the human condition as did Kennedy's opinion. Read Obergefell bubba. If you have ice water in your veins, it not my problem

God how I wish what you were saying was true. But it's not buttwipe.

If it were the state could qualify what marital love was, and you'd lose.

Your problem is that it's not true for you and therefore you think that everyone is lacking a heart and soul like you.

No one is saying that the law can qualify or quantify what love is. However, the law does recognize that all people have the right to seek out love and an emotionally meaningful relationship based on what love is to them. Obergefell relied on that reasoning to a great extent, but I don't expect you to get that.

 

[Pop23]

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Horseshit! The law takes into consideration all aspects of the human condition as did Kennedy's opinion. Read Obergefell bubba. If you have ice water in your veins, it not my problem

God how I wish what you were saying was true. But it's not buttwipe.

If it were the state could qualify what marital love was, and you'd lose.

Your problem is that it's not true for you and therefore you think that everyone is lacking a heart and soul like you.

No one is saying that the law can qualify or quantify what love is. However, the law does recognize that all people have the right to seek out love and an emotionally meaningful relationship based on what love is to them. Obergefell relied on that reasoning to a great extent, but I don't expect you to get that.

No you simpleton.

All the law does is meet out certain financial benefits. IT DOES NOTHING MORE.

You can make an incredibly dumb statement that a legal document has some deep emotional tie, which makes you and you're relationship the sad one if you think the government license can add anything emotional.

Mine never required a piece of paper. Maybe yours does.

 

[Faun]

Maybe. Find a statute that created gay marriage. There are none. What the Supreme Court ruled as legal is Same Sex Marriage, which is quite different in scope.

Marriage law does not include Love, sex or much other for these contracts to be valid.

The implication is massive. Get a 35 dollar license and lessen your tax load, pay no inheritance tax, less health insurance cost, survivors SSI and pension coverage. The economic damage could be severe, to tax roles, insurance companies and unioun and private pension plans.

And, since there are no real qualifications, the two parties, no matter sequality, can keep dating members of the opposite sex (who might also be married).

There is no downside.

By marketing this as "gay" marriage, they got the media and courts looking the other way.

Object and you were a homophobic bigot. And no media type or Judge wants that.

Perfectly executed marketing.

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Iowa doesn't give marriage licenses to immediate family members.

(3) not closely related by blood or first cousins.​

Gender is not a factor.

Are you an attorney? No?

then these guys know much, much more than you.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Guess you lose again

You're on a roll imbecile

Why are you posting about incest again? Didn't you say this issue isn't about incest?

And who knows how you think I've lost when Iowa says...

State of Iowa
Marriage Instructions​

IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF APPLICANTS TO READ THIS CAREFULLY BEFORE MAKING APPLICATION!

Iowa law provides that marriage is a civil contract between two persons who are (1) 18 years of age or older; (2) not already married to each other or still legally married to someone else; (3) not closely related by blood or first cousins; and (4) legally competent to enter into a civil contract. ​

Sucks to be you. And not just because you lost this argument.

 

[Pop23]

I wish you lots of luck preaching about anything relying on logic and reason to emotion-driven leftists. They're incapable of understanding anything that isn't all about their "feelz", and the idea of legal sanctions to marriage not being all about warm, fuzzy "we WUUUUUV each other!" is going to be a foreign language to them.

Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart.

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Iowa doesn't give marriage licenses to immediate family members.

(3) not closely related by blood or first cousins.​

Gender is not a factor.

Are you an attorney? No?

then these guys know much, much more than you.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Guess you lose again

You're on a roll imbecile

Why are you posting about incest again? Didn't you say this issue isn't about incest?

And who knows how you think I've lost when Iowa says...

State of Iowa
Marriage Instructions​

IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF APPLICANTS TO READ THIS CAREFULLY BEFORE MAKING APPLICATION!

Iowa law provides that marriage is a civil contract between two persons who are (1) 18 years of age or older; (2) not already married to each other or still legally married to someone else; (3) not closely related by blood or first cousins; and (4) legally competent to enter into a civil contract. ​

Sucks to be you. And not just because you lost this argument.

Because iowa only prohibits marriage between opposite sex couples, not to closely related.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

So Sayeth those that practice this law.....

Sucks to be you. Of course, you enjoy sucking, so there's that

 

[Seawytch]

No, you supplied your interpretation of a law. An interpretation you've been unable to prove is in effect as you claim.

And that dude is dancing on the grave of your argument after you yourself drove yet another nail into it coffin by comparing Kim Davis, who was jailed for not following the law; with Polk County, whose clerk has not been jailed for what you claim, is in violation of the law.

Obviously, the law is not what you think it is.

Projecting again?

I supplied the letter of the law. You've been unable to present any argument that the law is as written.

Of course the reason you can't is because you simply can't face the fact that you're wrong.

It should be easy to provide a link to either the Iowa Supreme Court or the Iowa Statute that makes same sex family marriage illegal.

But you can't? Why?

Because same sex family marriage is legal as noted in the Iowa statute 595.

So



BOOM


You lost again.

Repeating that doesn't help you. You don't understand marriage laws regarding gender were affected by Supreme Court rulings. You keep saying the law is still in effect as written, but you can't prove it. Instead, you knocked yourself out by pointing out what happens to clerks who don't follow the law. They go to jail. More evidence you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about since the Polk County clerk did not go to jail.

Thanks again for that, btw.

Your red herring arguments are amusing.

I supplied the law. You have supplied nothing to support your own position.

Clerks don't go to jail for obeying state law.

Of course, maybe nazi's like you think they should?

No, i think clerks who don't follow the law, like Kim Davis, should go to jail. Meanwhile, no clerks in Iowa have been jailed for not following the law because they are following the law. Yet more evidence you don't have a fucking clue about that of which you speak.

No, you think clerks who don't behave the way you have deemed "moral" should be jailed. I have yet to see you call for the jailing of all the clerks who issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples in violation of the existing laws prior to the Supreme Court's fiat.

When ordered by a court of law to cease and desist...they did. Kim Davis did not. She continued to break the law.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Horseshit! The law takes into consideration all aspects of the human condition as did Kennedy's opinion. Read Obergefell bubba. If you have ice water in your veins, it not my problem

God how I wish what you were saying was true. But it's not buttwipe.

If it were the state could qualify what marital love was, and you'd lose.

Your problem is that it's not true for you and therefore you think that everyone is lacking a heart and soul like you.

No one is saying that the law can qualify or quantify what love is. However, the law does recognize that all people have the right to seek out love and an emotionally meaningful relationship based on what love is to them. Obergefell relied on that reasoning to a great extent, but I don't expect you to get that.

No you simpleton.

All the law does is meet out certain financial benefits. IT DOES NOTHING MORE.

You can make an incredibly dumb statement that a legal document has some deep emotional tie, which makes you and you're relationship the sad one if you think the government license can add anything emotional.

Mine never required a piece of paper. Maybe yours does.

Cut out the stupid mind fuck games. You twist words and misrepresent what is being said. Who the fuck said that the “piece of paper” provides or contributes to the emotional aspect of marriage?

If two people want to be together for emotional reasons, they are entitled to the LEGAL and financial security and benefits that go with marriage. If two people want to be married for the benefits that go with marriage, they have the right to marry someone who they have an emotional connection with and a physically attraction to.

That is why the stupid ass argument that gays already had equality because that could marry someone of the opposite sex fails so pathetically. And, your arguments, all of them are also pathetic

 

[Faun]

So for you marriage is not about feeling and emotion? It's a cold business arrangement devoid of all human feelings ? Have you read Obergefell? Kennedy cited "personal choice and intimacy in his opinion. Logic and reason would tell you that we are talking about living, feeling human beings .

If you believe that marriage is just an "arrangement, I feel sorry for you. Sadly, too many people in this country are infected with this nonsense, which is the main reason so many marriages fall apart

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Iowa doesn't give marriage licenses to immediate family members.

(3) not closely related by blood or first cousins.​

Gender is not a factor.

Are you an attorney? No?

then these guys know much, much more than you.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Guess you lose again

You're on a roll imbecile

Why are you posting about incest again? Didn't you say this issue isn't about incest?

And who knows how you think I've lost when Iowa says...

State of Iowa
Marriage Instructions​

IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF APPLICANTS TO READ THIS CAREFULLY BEFORE MAKING APPLICATION!

Iowa law provides that marriage is a civil contract between two persons who are (1) 18 years of age or older; (2) not already married to each other or still legally married to someone else; (3) not closely related by blood or first cousins; and (4) legally competent to enter into a civil contract. ​

Sucks to be you. And not just because you lost this argument.

Because iowa only prohibits marriage between opposite sex couples, not to closely related.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

So Sayeth those that practice this law.....

Sucks to be you. Of course, you enjoy sucking, so there's that

Sadly, that list of incest statutes doesn't help you since we're not talking about incest. We're talking about close-family marriage. Just because you're a pervert who can't stop fantasizing about incest doesn't mean anyone else here shares your personal interests.

You know, the type of marriage Iowa says they prohibit.



The rest of your post is nothing but your typical, I know you are, but what am I, pre-K knee-jerk responses.

 

[Pop23]

Read the law. Laws are void of emotion.

It was your side that made the argument that tradition (emotions) could not be argued to deny 14th amendment rights.

Want it both ways now?????

Iowa doesn't give marriage licenses to immediate family members.

(3) not closely related by blood or first cousins.​

Gender is not a factor.

Are you an attorney? No?

then these guys know much, much more than you.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Guess you lose again

You're on a roll imbecile

Why are you posting about incest again? Didn't you say this issue isn't about incest?

And who knows how you think I've lost when Iowa says...

State of Iowa
Marriage Instructions​

IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF APPLICANTS TO READ THIS CAREFULLY BEFORE MAKING APPLICATION!

Iowa law provides that marriage is a civil contract between two persons who are (1) 18 years of age or older; (2) not already married to each other or still legally married to someone else; (3) not closely related by blood or first cousins; and (4) legally competent to enter into a civil contract. ​

Sucks to be you. And not just because you lost this argument.

Because iowa only prohibits marriage between opposite sex couples, not to closely related.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

So Sayeth those that practice this law.....

Sucks to be you. Of course, you enjoy sucking, so there's that

Sadly, that list of incest statutes doesn't help you since we're not talking about incest. We're talking about close-family marriage. Just because you're a pervert who can't stop fantasizing about incest doesn't mean anyone else here shares your personal interests.

You know, the type of marriage Iowa says they prohibit.



The rest of your post is nothing but your typical, I know you are, but what am I, pre-K knee-jerk responses.

Find a post in which I attributed family marriage to incest.

Go ahead imbecile. You can't.

I did claim same sex marriage created the legality of family marriage.

Which now you finally have come to grips with pervert.

 

[Faun]

Iowa doesn't give marriage licenses to immediate family members.

(3) not closely related by blood or first cousins.​

Gender is not a factor.

Are you an attorney? No?

then these guys know much, much more than you.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Guess you lose again

You're on a roll imbecile

Why are you posting about incest again? Didn't you say this issue isn't about incest?

And who knows how you think I've lost when Iowa says...

State of Iowa
Marriage Instructions​

IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF APPLICANTS TO READ THIS CAREFULLY BEFORE MAKING APPLICATION!

Iowa law provides that marriage is a civil contract between two persons who are (1) 18 years of age or older; (2) not already married to each other or still legally married to someone else; (3) not closely related by blood or first cousins; and (4) legally competent to enter into a civil contract. ​

Sucks to be you. And not just because you lost this argument.

Because iowa only prohibits marriage between opposite sex couples, not to closely related.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

So Sayeth those that practice this law.....

Sucks to be you. Of course, you enjoy sucking, so there's that

Sadly, that list of incest statutes doesn't help you since we're not talking about incest. We're talking about close-family marriage. Just because you're a pervert who can't stop fantasizing about incest doesn't mean anyone else here shares your personal interests.

You know, the type of marriage Iowa says they prohibit.



The rest of your post is nothing but your typical, I know you are, but what am I, pre-K knee-jerk responses.

Find a post in which I attributed family marriage to incest.

Go ahead imbecile. You can't.

I did claim same sex marriage created the legality of family marriage.

Which now you finally have come to grips with pervert.

#1823, where you're asserting this list of incest statutes applies to marriage.

 

[Pop23]

Cut out the stupid mind fuck games. You twist words and misrepresent what is being said. Who the fuck said that the “piece of paper” provides or contributes to the emotional aspect of marriage?

If two people want to be together for emotional reasons, they are entitled to the LEGAL and financial security and benefits that go with marriage. If two people want to be married for the benefits that go with marriage, they have the right to marry someone who they have an emotional connection with and a physically attraction to.

That is why the stupid ass argument that gays already had equality because that could marry someone of the opposite sex fails so pathetically. And, your arguments, all of them are also pathetic

You may call them pathetic (like I give a rats ass), but so far they are not disputable.

So, rock on.

Go away boy , you bother me. You are as annoying as a horsefly at a picnic and equally useless.

Put me on ignore moron. I've kicked your ass so many times you put your underwear on backwards so it fits right.

Like just now?? LOL

^^^^^ wonders what a dicks for

Again, if you need paperwork to increase your pleasure with your partner.............

You don't understand much