Bill O’Reilly and Andrea Tantaros misconstrue 14th Amendment and “equal protection of the laws”.

[g5000]

Yeah, rightwinger really is super dumb. so is his sockmate, jake snarky.

They're two of the biggest loser twits on this sites. I just blocked Jake because his posts were irredeemably pointless.

I agree. and I strongly suspect that they are the same person with two user names. If you look at the talking points the post, the writing style, and the idiotic refusal to deal with facts, I can't prove it but you will notice that they are never on line at that same time.

I guess you guys can't handle having two different people owning you all the time....they MUST be one guy.

wrong, paid posters create multiple user names to make it look like there are more idiots like them than there really are. Its an internet message board game that they play.

Consider yourself informed.

Says who?

The voices in his head.

Redfish often manufactures bullshit based on what they tell him.

 

[g5000]

Why?

And seriously, you don't think children were the primary justification for government marriage? Seriously?

Yeah. People would have stopped having kids if the government had not stepped in. The human race was dying out ...

Nope. It's all about getting government cash and prizes for doing things you would do anyway. Always has been.

 

[kaz]

So your solution to the plethora of divorces s to increase them? I dont get it.
The end game here is not gay marriage. It is not polygamous marriage. It is the destruction of marriage. Once marriage ceases to have a sacred aspect it has none at all. That is the end game.

To me, marriage is what my wife and I make of it.

I know one guy that cheats on his wife. Is his marriage, in my eyes, as sacred as mine? No. Does it affect mine? No.

You want to be against gay marriage because it is your religious belief that gay sex is a sin and therefore gay marriage will promote a sin...I get it. I am fine with it. You have the right to wish to protect your religious view of homosexuality.

But to say that someone elses marriage will result in the destruction of the sacredness of marriage...in particular...your marriage....I just don't see it.

Sorry.

What if someone thinks the point of government marriage is encouraging children be born in wedlock? We only have so much tax money, why spend a bunch of it having gay marriage?

If that were the case, there would be something, somewhere in the marriage licensing that mentions children. And there would be something, somewhere in our other laws discouraging out-of-wedlock births.

Why?

And seriously, you don't think children were the primary justification for government marriage? Seriously?

Nope. I believe it was a mis step by government and initially used for census reasons.

Whether it was a misstep is not relevant to the question as to the intent. For you to say marriage was not driven by children is to say you know nothing about history and you're probably just playing word games because I know you and you're too smart to believe that nonsense.

Here's what I would give you. While the people thought it was about children, if you want to argue for politicians it wasn't just about that then I could go along with it to a degree. Politicians like to divide the people and pit them against each other. The last thing they want is a flat, even treatment of the people. They garner power by favoring one group over another, not by treating everyone fairly.

Government marriage is not necessary and government should treat it's citizens the same, but anything you read about the history of marriage starts with children. You know that, be serious

 

[kaz]

Why?

And seriously, you don't think children were the primary justification for government marriage? Seriously?

Yeah. People would have stopped having kids if the government had not stepped in. The human race was dying out ...

Nope. It's all about getting government cash and prizes for doing things you would do anyway. Always has been.

The ravings of an idiot, anything regarding what I actually said? I do like the liberal lack of long term memory. You and I have been in a lot of these threads, you truly are an idiot if you don't know what my position is on government marriage at this point. But when I say what motivated government marriage, that isn't MY view, idiot. That's the view of the people who created government marriage

 

[Jarhead]

To me, marriage is what my wife and I make of it.

I know one guy that cheats on his wife. Is his marriage, in my eyes, as sacred as mine? No. Does it affect mine? No.

You want to be against gay marriage because it is your religious belief that gay sex is a sin and therefore gay marriage will promote a sin...I get it. I am fine with it. You have the right to wish to protect your religious view of homosexuality.

But to say that someone elses marriage will result in the destruction of the sacredness of marriage...in particular...your marriage....I just don't see it.

Sorry.

What if someone thinks the point of government marriage is encouraging children be born in wedlock? We only have so much tax money, why spend a bunch of it having gay marriage?

If that were the case, there would be something, somewhere in the marriage licensing that mentions children. And there would be something, somewhere in our other laws discouraging out-of-wedlock births.

Why?

And seriously, you don't think children were the primary justification for government marriage? Seriously?

Nope. I believe it was a mis step by government and initially used for census reasons.

Whether it was a misstep is not relevant to the question as to the intent. For you to say marriage was not driven by children is to say you know nothing about history and you're probably just playing word games because I know you and you're too smart to believe that nonsense.

Here's what I would give you. While the people thought it was about children, if you want to argue for politicians it wasn't just about that then I could go along with it to a degree. Politicians like to divide the people and pit them against each other. The last thing they want is a flat, even treatment of the people. They garner power by favoring one group over another, not by treating everyone fairly.

Government marriage is not necessary and government should treat it's citizens the same, but anything you read about the history of marriage starts with children. You know that, be serious

Actually, I admit being naïve to the history of marriage. I agree, however, that our politicians are all about pitting groups against groups.

This is evident by the way they spin the motivations and intenttions of their political opposition.

 

[80zephyr]

All the problems in the world and the left thinks homo marriage is the most important issue. Get pretend married and shut the hell up already

It will all be over in a few months and then people will forget that there was a time people actually opposed gay marriage

What were they thinking?

Like abortion, right?

Mark

Yeah. Thank goodness that Republican Congress and all those Republican Presidents got rid of that.

You don't realize that the states are now limiting abortion? Did the issue go away was the question. Well, did it?

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

I'll never accept they are "married", with that said let them pretend, just keep it away from our children, life is hard enough without a bunch of confused misfits mucking it up even more

That's OK. Nobody says you have to like it, You just have to do it. Give everybody the same rights.

everybody has the same rights. gay marriage is NOT a right.

BTW. Andrea is HOT. (just trying to stir up the lesbians)

Straight marriage isn't a right then either.

true. there is not a single mention of marriage in the constitution, the bill of rights, or any of our founding documents.

if you want marriage of any type to be a right, the pass a constitutional amendment.

if you do such an amendment, would you prohibit multiple marriages? if so, on what basis?

But they do tend to speak about equal protection of the laws

Kind of covers everything

We limit equal protection all the time. Why can an 18 year old be an adult and not be able to drink liquor or buy a pistol?

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

Bullshit.
Gay people can file joint federal income tax statements if they are legally married to someone of the opposite sex.

TA-DAAAAAAAA!

Black people can file joint federal income tax statements if they are legally married to someone of the same race.

Same bullshit, different decade.

Huh? That wasnt even logical. Not remotely. Gays are not Negroes. Keep saying it and maybe its meaning will be clear.

Your reasoning was just as flawed as that of the racists. Exactly, identically, analogously, equally flawed.

Your erroneous reasoning and rhetoric is amazingly parallel to that of the racists of 50, 60 years ago.

And just like them, you have no rational basis for banning same sex marriage any more than they had for banning interracial marriage. At all.

Same bullshit, different decade.

Wrong. The government was in the "business" of protecting families because those families created our future citizens.

Gays cannot have a biological "family". Therefore, they do not deserve that protection. By definition, allowing gays to marry destroys the biological family unit.

It is not good for society or the country. To equate this with the blacks is laughable.

Mark

 

[BULLDOG]

That's OK. Nobody says you have to like it, You just have to do it. Give everybody the same rights.

everybody has the same rights. gay marriage is NOT a right.

BTW. Andrea is HOT. (just trying to stir up the lesbians)

Straight marriage isn't a right then either.

true. there is not a single mention of marriage in the constitution, the bill of rights, or any of our founding documents.

if you want marriage of any type to be a right, the pass a constitutional amendment.

if you do such an amendment, would you prohibit multiple marriages? if so, on what basis?

But they do tend to speak about equal protection of the laws

Kind of covers everything

We limit equal protection all the time. Why can an 18 year old be an adult and not be able to drink liquor or buy a pistol?

Mark

Send any 9 year old to Texas and he can buy all the guns he wants as long as he has the cash.

 

[Redfish]

Yeah, rightwinger really is super dumb. so is his sockmate, jake snarky.

They're two of the biggest loser twits on this sites. I just blocked Jake because his posts were irredeemably pointless.

I agree. and I strongly suspect that they are the same person with two user names. If you look at the talking points the post, the writing style, and the idiotic refusal to deal with facts, I can't prove it but you will notice that they are never on line at that same time.

I guess you guys can't handle having two different people owning you all the time....they MUST be one guy.

wrong, paid posters create multiple user names to make it look like there are more idiots like them than there really are. Its an internet message board game that they play.

Consider yourself informed.

Says who?

are you so naive that you think everyone on this board is just a random dude or dudette who likes to discuss politics? There are probably 2 plants for every 10 posters at any given time.

both sides have discovered that they can use message boards and forums to post lies and innuendo about their political opponents.

 

[Redfish]

everybody has the same rights. gay marriage is NOT a right.

BTW. Andrea is HOT. (just trying to stir up the lesbians)

Straight marriage isn't a right then either.

true. there is not a single mention of marriage in the constitution, the bill of rights, or any of our founding documents.

if you want marriage of any type to be a right, the pass a constitutional amendment.

if you do such an amendment, would you prohibit multiple marriages? if so, on what basis?

But they do tend to speak about equal protection of the laws

Kind of covers everything

We limit equal protection all the time. Why can an 18 year old be an adult and not be able to drink liquor or buy a pistol?

Mark

Send any 9 year old to Texas and he can buy all the guns he wants as long as he has the cash.

Liar--------------

 

[80zephyr]

Bullshit.
Gay people can file joint federal income tax statements if they are legally married to someone of the opposite sex.

TA-DAAAAAAAA!

Black people can file joint federal income tax statements if they are legally married to someone of the same race.

Same bullshit, different decade.

Huh? That wasnt even logical. Not remotely. Gays are not Negroes. Keep saying it and maybe its meaning will be clear.

What if the law said everyone can marry anyone of their own Religion, but cannot marry anyone who wasn't of their religion. And people of no religion could only marry someon of no religion.

Everyone would have equal rights, eh?

Nope. The great equalizer in marriage is GENDER. Families developed because the two genders could bond and create children.

If marriage is redefined to dismiss gender as the criteria, then marriage can be redefined to include any relationship imaginable. After all, if the rules can be changed for some, they certainly, by law, should be changed for others.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

We allow people to own guns. When will owning an atomic bomb be a constitutional right?

So you agree with me that the slippery slope argument is bullshit.

That depends, where is your "starting point"?

I say that gay marriage is the latest attack on the family. The left has pushed for "shacking up", feminism, making divorce easy, and welfare to make it easier yet.

It appears to me that the slippery slope is at its next step, with the leftist plan being to destroy the family unit, so that the government has to take care of us.

It is the leftist way.

Mark

 

[AmericanFirst]

All the problems in the world and the left thinks homo marriage is the most important issue. Get pretend married and shut the hell up already

It will all be over in a few months and then people will forget that there was a time people actually opposed gay marriage

What were they thinking?

I'll never accept they are "married", with that said let them pretend, just keep it away from our children, life is hard enough without a bunch of confused misfits mucking it up even more

Just like I'll never accept that you are "married. But you can pretend...just keep it away from our children. Life is hard enough without a bunch of confused haters mucking it up even more.

Gays are the confused idiots.

 

[BULLDOG]

Straight marriage isn't a right then either.

true. there is not a single mention of marriage in the constitution, the bill of rights, or any of our founding documents.

if you want marriage of any type to be a right, the pass a constitutional amendment.

if you do such an amendment, would you prohibit multiple marriages? if so, on what basis?

But they do tend to speak about equal protection of the laws

Kind of covers everything

We limit equal protection all the time. Why can an 18 year old be an adult and not be able to drink liquor or buy a pistol?

Mark

Send any 9 year old to Texas and he can buy all the guns he wants as long as he has the cash.

Liar--------------

There are no requirements for any checks whatsoever for individual gun sales in Texas. Some might not sell to a 9 year old, but there are plenty that would. With no requirement for any type of verification, how can you say anyone couldn't buy a gun?

 

[80zephyr]

agree, all of these gay threads run the same course with the same old tired failed arguments from the left. Its a waste of time and typing skills to participate in them.

true. there is not a single mention of marriage in the constitution, the bill of rights, or any of our founding documents.

if you want marriage of any type to be a right, the pass a constitutional amendment.

if you do such an amendment, would you prohibit multiple marriages? if so, on what basis?

You don't understand that not everything has to be mentioned specifically in the Constitution. In fact, in the Ninth Amendment, the framers made that clear.

Or the 10th where they said those were powers of the states? Yeah, marriage is a power of the state. Even federal courts have held that. Even the Supreme Court holds that.

And the US Constitution still takes precidence

The US COnstitution takes precedence over the US Constitution? Sure thing, Sparky.

Sure as hell takes precidence over States Constitution

You lose

Well, not according to the Constitution.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

true. there is not a single mention of marriage in the constitution, the bill of rights, or any of our founding documents.

if you want marriage of any type to be a right, the pass a constitutional amendment.

if you do such an amendment, would you prohibit multiple marriages? if so, on what basis?

But they do tend to speak about equal protection of the laws

Kind of covers everything

We limit equal protection all the time. Why can an 18 year old be an adult and not be able to drink liquor or buy a pistol?

Mark

Send any 9 year old to Texas and he can buy all the guns he wants as long as he has the cash.

Liar--------------

There are no requirements for any checks whatsoever for individual gun sales in Texas. Some might not sell to a 9 year old, but there are plenty that would. With no requirement for any type of verification, how can you say anyone couldn't buy a gun?

Then lets do it another way. The US government federal law states that you cannot sell a pistol to anyone that isn't 21 years of age.

If Texas is doing that, they are nullifying federal law. IOW's, if you think Texas is right, then you must also agree that Texas should be able to nullify any gay marriage law as well.

That about right?

Mark

 

[Redfish]

true. there is not a single mention of marriage in the constitution, the bill of rights, or any of our founding documents.

if you want marriage of any type to be a right, the pass a constitutional amendment.

if you do such an amendment, would you prohibit multiple marriages? if so, on what basis?

But they do tend to speak about equal protection of the laws

Kind of covers everything

We limit equal protection all the time. Why can an 18 year old be an adult and not be able to drink liquor or buy a pistol?

Mark

Send any 9 year old to Texas and he can buy all the guns he wants as long as he has the cash.

Liar--------------

There are no requirements for any checks whatsoever for individual gun sales in Texas. Some might not sell to a 9 year old, but there are plenty that would. With no requirement for any type of verification, how can you say anyone couldn't buy a gun?

no legitimate gun dealer is going to sell a gun to a 9 year old kid. Thats just a ridiculous statement.

 

[NYcarbineer]

We allow people to own guns. When will owning an atomic bomb be a constitutional right?

So you agree with me that the slippery slope argument is bullshit.

That depends, where is your "starting point"?

I say that gay marriage is the latest attack on the family. The left has pushed for "shacking up", feminism, making divorce easy, and welfare to make it easier yet.

It appears to me that the slippery slope is at its next step, with the leftist plan being to destroy the family unit, so that the government has to take care of us.

It is the leftist way.

Mark

How has your family been harmed in any way?

 

[NYcarbineer]

But they do tend to speak about equal protection of the laws

Kind of covers everything

We limit equal protection all the time. Why can an 18 year old be an adult and not be able to drink liquor or buy a pistol?

Mark

Send any 9 year old to Texas and he can buy all the guns he wants as long as he has the cash.

Liar--------------

There are no requirements for any checks whatsoever for individual gun sales in Texas. Some might not sell to a 9 year old, but there are plenty that would. With no requirement for any type of verification, how can you say anyone couldn't buy a gun?

no legitimate gun dealer is going to sell a gun to a 9 year old kid. Thats just a ridiculous statement.

NO ONE in Texas would sell guns to minors if it were legal?

lol