A Shortcut to Nixing The Gay Marriage Decision: Subtract Two Votes

[Silhouette]

Hahahaha

I know right? This "victory" is going to render a landslide for dems in 2016...

...come to think of it, this really was a victory for pro mother/father marriage folks after all; in a more permanent way..

 

[Judicial review]

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

 

[Skylar]

Hahahaha

I know right? This "victory" is going to render a landslide for dems in 2016...

...come to think of it, this really was a victory for pro mother/father marriage folks after all; in a more permanent way..

Wow. So you win by being completely and utterly wrong on every point.

Imagine that. And the cognitive dissonance is relieved.

 

[Skylar]

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

Sure there is. An amendment.

The problem is.....your ilk just don't have then numbers.

 

[Socialist]

The homophobes and bigots are coming out like flies.

 

[mdk]

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

Sure there is. An amendment.

The problem is.....your ilk just don't have then numbers.

Not even close. Any attempt they make will be futile.

 

[Skylar]

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

Sure there is. An amendment.

The problem is.....your ilk just don't have then numbers.

Not even close. Any attempt they make will be futile.

Oh, I'm not saying its likely. But either or both would be more likely than an amendment. It has the highest threshold in the constitution. Limiting the scope of the judiciary would take a simple majority of both houses.

 

[Judicial review]

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

Sure there is. An amendment.

The problem is.....your ilk just don't have then numbers.

There is no current amendment so yes I am correct in saying the votes are FINAL. Dude I'm ******* agreeing with your side on this. Morons. The OP said we can subtract justices votes. NO WE CANNOT!

 

[Skylar]

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

Sure there is. An amendment.

The problem is.....your ilk just don't have then numbers.

There is no current amendment so yes I am correct in saying the votes are FINAL. Dude I'm ******* agreeing with your side on this. Morons. The OP said we can subtract justices votes. NO WE CANNOT!

You said there is no vote that can reverse a vote cast by the supreme court. Yes, there is. An amendment can overturn them. And has.

So no, you're not correct.

 

[Judicial review]

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

Sure there is. An amendment.

The problem is.....your ilk just don't have then numbers.

There is no current amendment so yes I am correct in saying the votes are FINAL. Dude I'm ******* agreeing with your side on this. Morons. The OP said we can subtract justices votes. NO WE CANNOT!

You said there is no vote that can reverse a vote cast by the supreme court. Yes, there is. An amendment can overturn them. And has.

So no, you're not correct.

Dude, congress can't vote to SUBTRACT THE VOTES JUST CASTED!!!!!!!!! The OP said the 2 votes can be "subtracted" that it is mandatory for them to step DOWN. NO THERE IS NOT!

BTW I'M THE ONE WHO TOLD YOU EARIER ABOUT THE CONSTUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. THAT IS A WAY TO GET AROUND THIS RULING BUT THE VOTE ARE FINAL AND CAN"T BE CHANGED! HENCE MY POINT!

CARRY ON WITH THIS AND YOU ARE GOING ON IGNORE FOR BEING A TERRIBLE TROLL WHO IS WAY TOO OBVIOUS..............................TRY ME.

 

[Judicial review]

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

Sure there is. An amendment.

The problem is.....your ilk just don't have then numbers.

Not even close. Any attempt they make will be futile.

With how bad this is going to get with the Christians right protected under the constitution this is by far a bigger can of worms that will make the country say "is it worth it?" Lawsuits up the ass and it's already happening. States are going to defy this forever to protects religious freedom that was put into the bill of rights dating back to before the constitution was even written. Do you know how many relgions are against same sex marriage? Most of our nation are in them despite many breaking from their church on this issue, but when their church is being forced into a legal fight and members start seeing the toll it's taking on their faith and religion they will side with their faith and church.

The debate is now Same sex marriage OR religious freedom = Take your pick you only get 1.

 

[Skylar]

Dude, congress can't vote to SUBTRACT THE VOTES JUST CASTED!!!!!!!!! The OP said the 2 votes can be "subtracted" that it is mandatory for them to step DOWN. NO THERE IS NOT!

'Congress'? You're moving your goal posts. Lets review what you actually said.

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

There's no mention of 'congress'. You're backpedalling. Admit it....you were wrong. There is an authority that reverse a vote of the supreme court: an amendment.

So no, you weren't correct. You were demonstrably wrong.

BTW I'M THE ONE WHO TOLD YOU EARIER ABOUT THE CONSTUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE.

You.....you do realize that the amendment process predates you, right? That you didn't 'discover' it. Nor was it a grand secret. Or do you really think that no one had even heard of an amendment until you mentioned it....

.....today

 

[Judicial review]

Dude, congress can't vote to SUBTRACT THE VOTES JUST CASTED!!!!!!!!! The OP said the 2 votes can be "subtracted" that it is mandatory for them to step DOWN. NO THERE IS NOT!

'Congress'? You're moving your goal posts. Lets review what you actually said.

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

There's no mention of 'congress'. You're backpedalling. Admit it....you were wrong. There is an authority that reverse a vote of the supreme court: an amendment.

So no, you weren't correct. You were demonstrably wrong.

BTW I'M THE ONE WHO TOLD YOU EARIER ABOUT THE CONSTUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE.

You.....you do realize that the amendment process predates you, right? That you didn't 'discover' it. Nor was it a grand secret. Or do you really think that no one had even heard of an amendment until you mentioned it....

.....today

There is no rule or current authority in place RIGHT now that can be implimented to SUBTRACT 2 SC Justices votes. period. No direct way. However, ther eis a way AROUND it and that is with a constitutional amendment.

You need to read the OP yet AGAIN. I'm AGREEING WITH YOU I NEVER DIDN"T NOT AGREE WITH YOU. There is a difference between DIRECT and going AROUND. Remember the SC has to INTERPRET the CONSTITUTION. So and indirect way of getting this entire thing null and void is by CHANGING the CONSTITUTION not the SC.

1 last chance and it's ignore for you for TROLLLING.

 

[Skylar]

Dude, congress can't vote to SUBTRACT THE VOTES JUST CASTED!!!!!!!!! The OP said the 2 votes can be "subtracted" that it is mandatory for them to step DOWN. NO THERE IS NOT!

'Congress'? You're moving your goal posts. Lets review what you actually said.

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

There's no mention of 'congress'. You're backpedalling. Admit it....you were wrong. There is an authority that reverse a vote of the supreme court: an amendment.

So no, you weren't correct. You were demonstrably wrong.

BTW I'M THE ONE WHO TOLD YOU EARIER ABOUT THE CONSTUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE.

You.....you do realize that the amendment process predates you, right? That you didn't 'discover' it. Nor was it a grand secret. Or do you really think that no one had even heard of an amendment until you mentioned it....

.....today

There is no rule or current authority in place RIGHT now that can be implimented to SUBTRACT 2 SC Justices votes. period. No direct way. However, ther eis a way AROUND it and that is with a constitutional amendment.

And more backpedalling. As there's nothing in your post about 'direct'. Though at least you got the amendment part right.

Alas, you don't have the numbers for an amendment. Its not going to happen.

 

[Judicial review]

Dude, congress can't vote to SUBTRACT THE VOTES JUST CASTED!!!!!!!!! The OP said the 2 votes can be "subtracted" that it is mandatory for them to step DOWN. NO THERE IS NOT!

'Congress'? You're moving your goal posts. Lets review what you actually said.

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

There's no mention of 'congress'. You're backpedalling. Admit it....you were wrong. There is an authority that reverse a vote of the supreme court: an amendment.

So no, you weren't correct. You were demonstrably wrong.

BTW I'M THE ONE WHO TOLD YOU EARIER ABOUT THE CONSTUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE.

You.....you do realize that the amendment process predates you, right? That you didn't 'discover' it. Nor was it a grand secret. Or do you really think that no one had even heard of an amendment until you mentioned it....

.....today

There is no rule or current authority in place RIGHT now that can be implimented to SUBTRACT 2 SC Justices votes. period. No direct way. However, ther eis a way AROUND it and that is with a constitutional amendment.

And more backpedalling. As there's nothing in your post about 'direct'. Though at least you got the amendment part right.

Alas, you don't have the numbers for an amendment. Its not going to happen.

You can't REVERSE A SINGLE "VOTE." Read the BOLD. You can make a decision which is a group of all the SC justices vote(s) null and void by amending the US Constitution. You are wrong so go hide in a hole now.

 

[Moonglow]

Dude, congress can't vote to SUBTRACT THE VOTES JUST CASTED!!!!!!!!! The OP said the 2 votes can be "subtracted" that it is mandatory for them to step DOWN. NO THERE IS NOT!

'Congress'? You're moving your goal posts. Lets review what you actually said.

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

There's no mention of 'congress'. You're backpedalling. Admit it....you were wrong. There is an authority that reverse a vote of the supreme court: an amendment.

So no, you weren't correct. You were demonstrably wrong.

BTW I'M THE ONE WHO TOLD YOU EARIER ABOUT THE CONSTUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE.

You.....you do realize that the amendment process predates you, right? That you didn't 'discover' it. Nor was it a grand secret. Or do you really think that no one had even heard of an amendment until you mentioned it....

.....today

There is no rule or current authority in place RIGHT now that can be implimented to SUBTRACT 2 SC Justices votes. period. No direct way. However, ther eis a way AROUND it and that is with a constitutional amendment.

You need to read the OP yet AGAIN. I'm AGREEING WITH YOU I NEVER DIDN"T NOT AGREE WITH YOU. There is a difference between DIRECT and going AROUND. Remember the SC has to INTERPRET the CONSTITUTION. So and indirect way of getting this entire thing null and void is by CHANGING the CONSTITUTION not the SC.

1 last chance and it's ignore for you for TROLLLING.

I am sorry your homophobia has led you to believe that your God given right is to discriminate against a minority...

 

[Judicial review]

Dude, congress can't vote to SUBTRACT THE VOTES JUST CASTED!!!!!!!!! The OP said the 2 votes can be "subtracted" that it is mandatory for them to step DOWN. NO THERE IS NOT!

'Congress'? You're moving your goal posts. Lets review what you actually said.

There is no law or authority that can reverse a vote that was casted by a supreme court justice. Period. This thread is a joke and I'm sorry, but wishful thinking. Watch the massive repercussions of this dicission yesterday and watch many states calling for a constitutional amendment. Watch North Carolina in particular.

There's no mention of 'congress'. You're backpedalling. Admit it....you were wrong. There is an authority that reverse a vote of the supreme court: an amendment.

So no, you weren't correct. You were demonstrably wrong.

BTW I'M THE ONE WHO TOLD YOU EARIER ABOUT THE CONSTUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE.

You.....you do realize that the amendment process predates you, right? That you didn't 'discover' it. Nor was it a grand secret. Or do you really think that no one had even heard of an amendment until you mentioned it....

.....today

There is no rule or current authority in place RIGHT now that can be implimented to SUBTRACT 2 SC Justices votes. period. No direct way. However, ther eis a way AROUND it and that is with a constitutional amendment.

You need to read the OP yet AGAIN. I'm AGREEING WITH YOU I NEVER DIDN"T NOT AGREE WITH YOU. There is a difference between DIRECT and going AROUND. Remember the SC has to INTERPRET the CONSTITUTION. So and indirect way of getting this entire thing null and void is by CHANGING the CONSTITUTION not the SC.

1 last chance and it's ignore for you for TROLLLING.

I am sorry your homophobia has led you to believe that your God given right is to discriminate against a minority...

You can't force a religion to go against it's teaching of not rewarding what there religion calls SIN. Period. This right was so much more important than marriage it was part of the original 1st amendment 1st bill of rights. Tough shit moonass.

 

[toxicmedia]

We've been through this, Sil. The Supreme Court upheld the rights of states to authorize same sex marriage in Windsor v. US. Both Maryland and DC had already authorized it. Kagan and Ginsberg officiated weddings in Maryland DC respectively. Destroying your argument.

Its impossible to demonstrate a bias against same sex marriage bans when there are no same sex marriage bans.

Caperton was about an elected judge that had received huge campaign contributions from someone that he was adjudicating a case for. Neither Ginsberg nor Kagan were elected. Neither accept campaign contributions. No one involved in Obergefell provided them with anything. And they received no benefit from performing those weddings.

Nixing every tenet of possible bias in Caperton.

You simply don't know what you're talking about.

Everyone has been through this with Sil. And not just on this site

 

[Skylar]

We've been through this, Sil. The Supreme Court upheld the rights of states to authorize same sex marriage in Windsor v. US. Both Maryland and DC had already authorized it. Kagan and Ginsberg officiated weddings in Maryland DC respectively. Destroying your argument.

Its impossible to demonstrate a bias against same sex marriage bans when there are no same sex marriage bans.

Caperton was about an elected judge that had received huge campaign contributions from someone that he was adjudicating a case for. Neither Ginsberg nor Kagan were elected. Neither accept campaign contributions. No one involved in Obergefell provided them with anything. And they received no benefit from performing those weddings.

Nixing every tenet of possible bias in Caperton.

You simply don't know what you're talking about.

Everyone has been through this with Sil. And not just on this site

Sil is building up a way to relieve the dissonance between what he believed was gonna happen and what actually did. Part of that process is finding pseudo-legal gibberish to convince himself that the ruling was invalid and thus doesn't count. Its like the birthers and their birth certificate. They can't contest the vote. So they're going to insist it was invalid because they made up a conspiracy.

 

[Judicial review]

We've been through this, Sil. The Supreme Court upheld the rights of states to authorize same sex marriage in Windsor v. US. Both Maryland and DC had already authorized it. Kagan and Ginsberg officiated weddings in Maryland DC respectively. Destroying your argument.

Its impossible to demonstrate a bias against same sex marriage bans when there are no same sex marriage bans.

Caperton was about an elected judge that had received huge campaign contributions from someone that he was adjudicating a case for. Neither Ginsberg nor Kagan were elected. Neither accept campaign contributions. No one involved in Obergefell provided them with anything. And they received no benefit from performing those weddings.

Nixing every tenet of possible bias in Caperton.

You simply don't know what you're talking about.

Everyone has been through this with Sil. And not just on this site

Sil is building up a way to relieve the dissonance between what he believed was gonna happen and what actually did. Part of that process is finding pseudo-legal gibberish to convince himself that the ruling was invalid and thus doesn't count. Its like the birthers and their birth certificate. They can't contest the vote. So they're going to insist it was invalid because they made up a conspiracy.

Smart move to move on.