60 Percent Of Americans Soon Will Live In States With Marriage Equality

[Skylar]

Wrong! It is the far left who does not understand what "rights" are in this nation.

Says you. Citing yourself. Whereas we have the USSC and generations old legal precedent confirming that marriage is a right.

You've given us no reason to ignore the USSC and generations of case law and instead believe you citing you.

There is no reason. As you have no idea what you're talking about. And the USSC does.

 

[Skylar]

So in other words the far left keywords and scare tactics from using those keywords like "rights", "Civil Rights", etc. are just that, words!

And what 'far left keywords' would those be? The one's you've made up? You've fastidiously avoided any claims that I've made, instead refuting imaginary arguments from a hypothetical 'far left drone'.

Which makes a certain sense. As you have no rational retort to my arguments. You have no valid reason to deny gays and lesbians the right to marry. You have no reason why any rational person would ignore the USSC and generations of case law and instead believe you citing yourself.

So you run. Keep running.

 

[Kosh]

So in other words the far left keywords and scare tactics from using those keywords like "rights", "Civil Rights", etc. are just that, words!

And what 'far left keywords' would those be? The one's you've made up? You've fastidiously avoided any claims that I've made, instead refuting imaginary arguments from a hypothetical 'far left drone'.

Which makes a certain sense. As you have no rational retort to my arguments. You have no valid reason to deny gays and lesbians the right to marry. You have no reason why any rational person would ignore the USSC and generations of case law and instead believe you citing yourself.

So you run. Keep running.

The words where posted and they have been used over and over again on this thread.

They are the go to words fro the far left to scare people into think that have had something taken away that did not exist in the first place.

Marriage is not a "right"

The government should get out of the business of "Marriage".

Then to some here they think that the whole tax code would fall apart if that happened.

 

[Skylar]

So in other words the far left keywords and scare tactics from using those keywords like "rights", "Civil Rights", etc. are just that, words!

The recognition of gay marriage as a right is from the USSC. Which, like anything else that contradicts you, you ignore.

Alas, you've never given a reason to ignore the USSC and their recognition of marriage as a right just because its inconvenient to your argument.

 

[Youch]

The total population of those states, based on 2013 estimates from the Census Bureau, is about 190 million. Just over 60 percent of the U.S. population now lives in a state where marriage equality soon will be legal.

And with Millennials coming into the mjority they stand out for voting heavily Democratic and for liberal views on many political and social issues, ranging from a belief in an activist government to support for same-sex marriage and marijuana legalization.

These findings are based on a new Pew Research Center survey conducted
Feb. 14-23, 2014 among 1,821 adults nationwide, including 617 Millennial adults, and analysis of other Pew Research Center surveys conducted between 1990 and 2014.

Millennials in Adulthood Pew Research Center s Social Demographic Trends Project

You're correct, with almost every word........we are doomed as a free society. The power of 2.5% of the population over the majority, a legalized drug that does not make you smarter or more ambitious, and the dismantling of the central family unit. Bravo libs!! You're almost at utopia.

I don't get it.

I know. And that is the problem.

So, why did you feel the need to take part of my quote out of this then?

Are you saying it makes sense for the right to talk about too much power of too few, then to talk about how you don't like it when people aren't controlled.

Please tell me how this is consistent.

I don't wish to discuss when the breakdown of communication began. My points are almost always verbatim, no need to read into or between the lines.

I stated clearly (hopefully in this thread, I'm involved in so many, don't have time to re-read each) that the Supreme Court just over-road the opinion of the vast majority of the citizens of those states, thus by default making a progressive court case the law of the land. Libs celebrate the minor battle, while oblivious to the loss of the greater war. In case that was not clear, the war against federalism and individual rights. Citizens and the Constitution be damned, they were hell bent on advocating a progressive agenda. 5 of 9 unelected black robes taking an activist, rather than their prescribed constitutional, obligation. THAT was my point (here and/or elsewhere).

Please discuss with civility. Thank you.

 

[Youch]

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

He knows they can't, he just WANTS them to be able to.

In contrast, you want the minority to vote away the rights of the majority---------can't you see that?

There is no right being taken away from bigots.

you are correct, you bigots are not having any rights taken from you by the US constitution and statutes.

Gays are not the ones trying to keep a fundamental right from a minority group Fishy, you are. That makes you an unadulterated bigot. There is no right you are losing by my legal, civil marriage...which by the way will be celebrating its 6th anniversary at the end of this month.

It is important to remember that conservatives, some of them mind you. are not "trying to keep a fundamental right away from a minority group," as you suggest. They are instead responding to a militant and progressive movement to change definitions and the historic and fundamental traditions of marriage. NOBODY is denying gays from civil unions and other such legal and contractual agreements that protect them in all relevant ways. What it all boils down to is not "rights" but public acceptance, and that isn't going to happen with the methodologies in play by the aggressive, militant, intolerant leftists of this country and most others. A naturally occurring sexual abnormality is worthy of respect and acknowledgment, but to aggressively assert such a thing into a natural and historical institution called marriage is clearly a debatable topic worthy of respect on both sides, yet the libs give ZERO respect for the historical and pre-historical nature of sanctified natural pair-bonding.

I understand the radicals will not understand a word I just said. Been there, done that.

 

[Skylar]

I stated clearly (hopefully in this thread, I'm involved in so many, don't have time to re-read each) that the Supreme Court just over-road the opinion of the vast majority of the citizens of those states, thus by default making a progressive court case the law of the land

I don't think so. A solid majority in Wisconsin for example support same sex marriage now. With support of 55% to opposition of 37% (per the most recent Marque University poll in taken in May), it seems that support for gay marriage is pretty close to the national averages taken by polling agencies like Gallup (55 to 42 in favor in May 2014).

In Colorado, same sex marriage passed 56 to 44. If that's the 'vast majority', then the 'vast majority' of the nation supports same sex marriage by the same standards. As the margin of victory and the spread on the lastest Gallup poll are both 12 points. Worse, the latest PPP poll shows support for gay marriage that is almost a mirror to support against it in 2006. With 55 supporting gay marriage and only 38% opposing.

By your own standards, the 'vast majority' of Colorado citizens support gay marriage.

Every federal court to hear the case ruled in favor of same sex marriage. Every single one. The case against gay marriage fails both the rational and Strict Scrutiny tests that the withholding of rights is subject to. There's no state interest, no good reason to deny such rights. The state needs a compelling interest to withhold rights from someone. And they have none in Colorado.

And so far, anywhere else in the US federal court system.

5 of 9 unelected black robes taking an activist, rather than their prescribed constitutional, obligation. THAT was my point (here and/or elsewhere).

Several problems there. First, adjudication and the protection of rights is what the USSC is suppposed to do. They were intended by the founders to weight a given piece of legislation against the constitution. And 'unelected'. That too is by design.

Second, it only takes 4 justices to grant cert. Which means some if not all of the conservative justices refused to hear the appeals and allowed the lower court rulings to stand. Not just one appeal. Or two. Or three.

All 5 appeals from the 4th, 7th and 10th appeals districts were rejected. And all at once. By *at least* 6 justices.

 

[Kosh]

So in other words the far left keywords and scare tactics from using those keywords like "rights", "Civil Rights", etc. are just that, words!

The recognition of gay marriage as a right is from the USSC. Which, like anything else that contradicts you, you ignore.

Alas, you've never given a reason to ignore the USSC and their recognition of marriage as a right just because its inconvenient to your argument.

Yes I know the far left sees a non-opinion and non-ruling from the USSC as a ruling and a "blessing".

And "Marriage" is not a "right".

 

[Kosh]

He knows they can't, he just WANTS them to be able to.

In contrast, you want the minority to vote away the rights of the majority---------can't you see that?

There is no right being taken away from bigots.

you are correct, you bigots are not having any rights taken from you by the US constitution and statutes.

Gays are not the ones trying to keep a fundamental right from a minority group Fishy, you are. That makes you an unadulterated bigot. There is no right you are losing by my legal, civil marriage...which by the way will be celebrating its 6th anniversary at the end of this month.

It is important to remember that conservatives, some of them mind you. are not "trying to keep a fundamental right away from a minority group," as you suggest. They are instead responding to a militant and progressive movement to change definitions and the historic and fundamental traditions of marriage. NOBODY is denying gays from civil unions and other such legal and contractual agreements that protect them in all relevant ways. What it all boils down to is not "rights" but public acceptance, and that isn't going to happen with the methodologies in play by the aggressive, militant, intolerant leftists of this country and most others. A naturally occurring sexual abnormality is worthy of respect and acknowledgment, but to aggressively assert such a thing into a natural and historical institution called marriage is clearly a debatable topic worthy of respect on both sides, yet the libs give ZERO respect for the historical and pre-historical nature of sanctified natural pair-bonding.

I understand the radicals will not understand a word I just said. Been there, done that.

Bingo!

That falls back to the whole separation of church and state argument. The far left is know for wanting this except in the case of "Marriage".

The government should not be in the business of "Marriage" anyway.

If they want to tax people so be it, but they do not need to know who is married and who is not married. It is none of their business. Well that is if people what "equal" treatment under the law.

 

[Skylar]

Yes I know the far left sees a non-opinion and non-ruling from the USSC as a ruling and a "blessing".

You're still denying that the USSC rejected not one, not two, not three, not four, but FIVE different appeals from states that had same sex bans overturned?

The Supreme Court on Monday turned away appeals from five states looking to prohibit gay marriage, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage in those states and likely others -- but also leaving the issue unresolved nationally.

The justices rejected appeals from Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. The court's order immediately ends delays on gay marriage in those states.

Supreme Court paves way for gay marriage in several states leaves issue unresolved nationally Fox News

Or is Fox News too 'far left' for you to accept as valid? Do you still deny that the USSC has preserved every lower court ruling overturning gay marriage bans? That the USSC ruled that provisions of DOMA prohibiting the recognition of same sex marriages was unconstitutional?

If so, wow. Just...wow.

And "Marriage" is not a "right".

Says you. The SCOTUS says otherwise. Thus, marriage is a legally recognized and legally protected right in this country.

And there's nothing you can do about it.

 

[Skylar]

That falls back to the whole separation of church and state argument. The far left is know for wanting this except in the case of "Marriage".

Obviously, it doesn't. As religion doesn't define marriage under the law. No one gives a fiddler's **** what religion has to say on marriage under the law. Not the law. And certainly not the courts.

There's your separation of church and State.

The government should not be in the business of "Marriage" anyway.

Says who? There are all sorts of legal rights and privileges that the State protects with marriage. Inherentence, Work benefits, medical decisions, social security benefits, exemptions from testifying in court, child custody issues, joint property, etc..

If you want a marriage without state recognition, you can have one. Just don't file a marriage license and 'call' yourself married.

If however, you want a marriage recognized and protected by the State, you can have that too.

Its a win-win for everyone.

 

[Kosh]

That falls back to the whole separation of church and state argument. The far left is know for wanting this except in the case of "Marriage".

Obviously, it doesn't. As religion doesn't define marriage under the law. No one gives a fiddler's **** what religion has to say on marriage under the law. Not the law. And certainly not the courts.

There's your separation of church and State.

The government should not be in the business of "Marriage" anyway.

Says who? There are all sorts of legal rights and privileges that the State protects with marriage. Inherentence, Work benefits, medical decisions, social security benefits, exemptions from testifying in court, child custody issues, joint property, etc..

If you want a marriage without state recognition, you can have one. Just don't file a marriage license and 'call' yourself married.

If however, you want a marriage recognized and protected by the State, you can have that too.

Its a win-win for everyone.

Once again the far left shows they want the government to dictate every aspect of ones lives to them.

Also more propaganda based on 1950's thinking being shown by the far left here. Other than Social Security, the rest can be decided in court, just like heterosexual couples. So why do you want special privileges that heterosexual couples do not have?

 

[elektra]

Marriage Equality is child abuse, Homosexuals have no right to deny children a mother, a father, or both.

 

[Skylar]

Once again the far left shows they want the government to dictate every aspect of ones lives to them.

How does legally recognizing gay marriage mean that the 'government dictates every aspect of one's life'?

Also more propaganda based on 1950's thinking being shown by the far left here. Other than Social Security, the rest can be decided in court, just like heterosexual couples. So why do you want special privileges that heterosexual couples do not have?

Marriage takes care of it one fell swoop. And protects and entire basket of rights and privileges. Including social security. There's simply no reason to deny gays and lesbians legal recognition of their marriages. Nor any need to scrap all laws and all marriage licenses just to keep gays out.

Its far easier, far simpler and far more just to simply recognize gay marriages as being as legally valid as straight ones.

Which is what the courts have ordered again and again and again.

 

[Skylar]

Marriage Equality is child abuse

Obviously, it isn't.

Homosexuals have no right to deny children a mother, a father, or both.

They have as much right as any single parent.

And of course, no state requires that any marriage include children to be valid. No state requires the ability to have children for a marriage to be valid. Why then would we invent a standard that applies to no one......and then apply it only to gays?

It makes no sense.

 

[Kosh]

Once again the far left shows they want the government to dictate every aspect of ones lives to them.

How does legally recognizing gay marriage mean that the 'government dictates every aspect of one's life'?

Also more propaganda based on 1950's thinking being shown by the far left here. Other than Social Security, the rest can be decided in court, just like heterosexual couples. So why do you want special privileges that heterosexual couples do not have?

Marriage takes care of it one fell swoop. And protects and entire basket of rights and privileges. Including social security. There's simply no reason to deny gays and lesbians legal recognition of their marriages. Nor any need to scrap all laws and all marriage licenses just to keep gays out.

Its far easier, far simpler and far more just to simply recognize gay marriages as being as legally valid as straight ones.

Which is what the courts have ordered again and again and again.

More proof that the far left is running on propaganda and talking points and they want the gay "Marriages" to have special privileges that other "Marriages" do not.

Perfect example of how this is more about revenge than any actual claim to "rights" or "equality".

And the far left once again shows they would much rather force the government to dictate every aspect ones life.

Please show how getting the government out of the business of "Marriage", "Invalidates" "Marriage"?

The far left just loves to make up rights and protects that do not exist.

 

[elektra]

Marriage Equality is child abuse

Obviously, it isn't.

Homosexuals have no right to deny children a mother, a father, or both.

They have as much right as any single parent.[/QUOTE]
Homosexual's have a right to deny children, a Mother or Father?

Marriage Equality is a violation of Children's rights. Homosexuals have no right to deny children a Mother and Father,

Of all the problems in the world, the idea of forcing children into a government designed homosexual family is healthy is just plane old tyranny.

We must save our children from this sickness.

 

[Skylar]

More proof that the far left is running on propaganda and talking points and they want the gay "Marriages" to have special privileges that other "Marriages" do not.

And what 'special privileges' are you referring to that the 'far left' wants to gay marriages to have that other marriages do not? And by all means, be specific.

Perfect example of how this is more about revenge than any actual claim to "rights" or "equality".

How is equal protection under the law 'revenge'? And who, pray tell, is it 'revenge' against?

And the far left once again shows they would much rather force the government to dictate every aspect ones life.

And for the 3rd time, how does legally recognizing gay marriage mean that 'government dictates every aspect of one's life'. You seem a little vague on how that works.

The far left just loves to make up rights and protects that do not exist.

You say marriage isn't a right. The Supreme Court disagrees. Thus, marriage is a legally recognized and legally protected right, regardless of what you believe.

 

[Skylar]

Homosexual's have a right to deny children, a Mother or Father?

As much as any single parent.

Marriage Equality is a violation of Children's rights. Homosexuals have no right to deny children a Mother and Father,

Since no marriage requires children or the ability to have them, how are children relevant to the validity of any marriage? Surely no straight couple is held to that standard. No single parent is. Why then would we apply it to gays.....and exclusively?

Of all the problems in the world, the idea of forcing children into a government designed homosexual family is healthy is just plane old tyranny.

I don't think tyranny means what you think it means.

 

[Youch]

I don't think so.

Of course not, because you ignore the several states that voted against gay marriage (many millions of voters and thus more people) who just got the rug pulled out from under them based on this abdication of the rule of constitutional law. It is really a simple matter, and a matter not about what one thinks of gay marriage....what just happened is much bigger than that.

Most folks are too occupied with their cell phones to understand or care about such implications. I'm not one of those people.