Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 51,401
- 15,068
- 2,180
Well...actually...Skylar is correct discussing "gay marriage" here. And the reason is that he knows Obergefell is challengeable on multiple levels.I didn't abandon anything, I just don't beat my head against a wall over something that will likely never be walked back. I also try to stick to the topic which you have steered into the only topic on USMB you ever discuss. This thread is about firing homos, not homo nuptials.
Nope. You're just doing your typical 'imagination equals law' shtick where you insist your pseudo-legal gibberish is a genuine legal controversy.
It isn't. You have no idea what you're talking about. And your record of predicting legal outcomes is one of perfect failure.
That it isn't based on any "rights" granted anywhere that apply "sexual orientation" to "sex" in the 14th Amendment, is but one blow to its credibility.
Says you. The Supreme Court cited the equal protection clause and the due process clause of the 14th and 5th amendment.
You ignoring the Supreme Court has no relevance to the authority of their ruling.
This latest decision by the federal appeals courts says that sex IS NOT legally equivalent to sexual orientation (a behavior). That perhaps is the worst blow of all so far since this is the false premise the cult of LGBT has been leaning on so heavily in all their advances.
Nope. Its completely irrelevant to the Obergefell ruling. As Obegefell isn't based on the idea that sex and sexual orientation are equivalent. Nor does the ruling cite the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as its legal basis. Nor does a lower court ruling invalidate a Supreme Court ruling.
There is simply no angle where your reasoning works.
You're feeding yourself pseudo-legal fantasies to soothe your cognitive dissonance between what you wanted to happen...and what actually did. And that nonsense has never worked out for you.
As your legal predictions are always, always wrong.