Ex-Judge Roy Moore Files Supreme Court Brief to Urge End to Marriage Equality

[Polishprince]

Why does the OP want to marry another man?

I don't you dip shit. I am married to a woman. 30 years. But I support the right of those who do. Is it that hard for your small mind to understand that straight people might advocate for LGBT people ? Apparently so.

It's a known fact that most homesexuals ask questions on message boards and them answer them in the next sentence.

It's a known fact that all bigots are morons who make assumptions about others sexuality based on their politics and advocacy

No I just think it's a mental illness to let another man poke his weenie in you butt.

You nailed it. When I was a kid, this was universally recognized. Homos were known by everyone as mal-adjusted adults.

I certainly didn't "hate" someone who forfeited their manhood to become a Pansy. But I didn't glorify them, the other boys wanted to be normal adults too, not spend their evenings standing on a corner wearing a dress.

 

[beautress]

I think Judge Moore has it right.

He supports the traditional family that produces children with a mother and a father present in the home.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I think Judge Moore has it right.

He supports the traditional family that produces children with a mother and a father present in the home.

Roy Moron is a narrow minded bigot and religious fanatic. What you people can't seem to understand is that gay couples do have children, form families and are parents. Children need parents, preferably two parents who are married in order to provide them with the financial advantages and legal protections that go with marriage. It matters little what they have between their respective legs.

In addition, supporting their right to do so in not way means that "traditional families" are not also valued.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I think Judge Moore has it right.

He supports the traditional family that produces children with a mother and a father present in the home.

Roy Moron is a narrow minded bigot and religious fanatic. What you people can't seem to understand is that gay couples do have children, form families and are parents. Children need parents, preferably two parents who are married in order to provide them with the financial advantages and legal protections that go with marriage. It matters little what they have between their respective legs.

In addition, supporting their right to do so in not way means that "traditional families" are not also valued.

Which is the key point.

Traditional marriage has been trashed by heterosexuals. They divorce at 50%+. Hard to make a case for it being so "special".

Many respond by taking it out on gays.

I don't necessarily agree with what is happening, but it sure seems that heterosexuals could fix their own situation before pissing all over others in frustration.

 

[CHAZBUKOWSKI]

This is sickening, disgusting and heart breaking ! There is something seriously wrong with people who think that they have the right to control the lives of other people in the name of their distorted and bastardized version of religious liberty.

Same sex marriage has been the law of the land since June of 2015. Five years. Same sex couples have actually been getting married much longer than that in some states. Society has not been undermined and the institution of marriage has not been destroyed. In fact, in my estimation, is stronger when there is inclusion and the base is broadened.

Furthermore, it is not even an issue for the vast majority of Americans. These same sex couple have just become part of the social fabric and are an integral part of the community like everyone else. They work, they pay taxes, they volunteer, the maintain homes and establish families. And now they and their children can enjoy the same legal protections , financial advantages and social status as the rest of us take for granted.

And what will happen if Obergefell is overturned. No doubt some states- and we could pretty much name then- would halt such weddings. But it is unknown if they would, or could void the marriages that have taken place already. Straight people should consider how they would feel if their marriage was somehow annulled for some bogus religious reason- such as not being married in a church. They should think about how their lives would be upended by a cascade of legal and financial issues thrown at them.

It is clear to me that people like Davis and Moore have serious problems and suffer from something bordering on a religious psychosis. They have absolutely no compassion or empathy for the people who would be devastated by this.

I can think of no time in the history of this nation that a right was established and then revoked. It would truly be a dark day in America if such a thing were to happen . My only hope is that John Roberts, a conservative to be sure- but one who is also concerned about his legacy, and that of his court-would not let this happen.

Ex-Judge Roy Moore Files Supreme Court Brief to Urge End to Equal Marriage

"The Foundation believes that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment did not intend for it to protect a right to same-sex marriage," the briefing said.

www.newsweek.com

When Obergefell v. Hodges was decided in 2015, Moore ordered Alabama judges to ignore the ruling. Moore was suspended for that action.

Same-sex marriage was legalized in 2015 by the Supreme Court's decision in the Obergefell v. Hodges case in which justices found that the Fourteenth Amendment protects both opposite-sex and same-sex marriage.

"The Foundation has an interest in this case because it believes that religious liberty is the foremost gift of God," the briefing read, "and Kim Davis was deprived of her religious liberty because of this Court's decision in Obergefell."

"In addition, the Foundation believes that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment did not intend for it to protect a right to same-sex marriage," the briefing continued.

This brief has nothing to do with Judge Moore's religious or moral beliefs. It was his LEGAL opinion, based upon what he sees as the intent of the writers of the 14th Amendment.

If you think that the folks who wrote and ratified the 14th intended to invent the Institution of Gay Marriage, that's certainly a different opinion than that of Moore.

There is nothing "disgusting" or "sickening" about making legal arguments before the courts.

If you sincerely think that Roy's motivation is not religious, you very well could be the biggest moron in board history. Don't think that is the case though. You are just willing to stoop to whatever level of feigned ignorance to try and maintain a sh1theel stance.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Roy Moron is a narrow minded bigot and religious fanatic.

That's what you think about any Christian, and about anyone who holds to an vestige of decent moral values.

Being outright evil, you hate anyone who is not evil.

You are more of a bigot that your wildest, most depraved false accusations make anyone else to be.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Traditional marriage has been trashed by heterosexuals. They divorce at 50%+. Hard to make a case for it being so "special".

That, in itself, is a great tragedy. I don't think any reasonable person will say otherwise.

Since long before most of us were born, we knew the social ills caused by children who “came from broken homes”. We've always known that this results in higher rates of criminality, drug abuse, and a wide ranger of other tragic consequences for these children, and for society as a whole.

But none of this excuses deliberately creating homes that were never unbroken to begin with,and putting children into those, guaranteeing that a large portion of these children will suffer the consequences that we've always known such circumstances create.

If anything, this latter trend only undermines the value that society puts on the proper family structure, contributing to the failure of proper families, and even to the failure to create proper families in the first place.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

This brief has nothing to do with Judge Moore's religious or moral beliefs. It was his LEGAL opinion, based upon what he sees as the intent of the writers of the 14th Amendment.

I'll disagree here with Polishprince. There is nothing wrong with holding and promoting a legal opinion that is based on the clear distinction between right and wrong, nor with acknowledging religion as a support for right over wrong.

Ultimately, that's the point of nearly all laws, to uphold some standard of what is good and what is evil, what is moral and what is immoral.

Stealing is wrong, and we have laws against it. Killing is wrong, and we have laws against it. And you'll find both of these in the Bible, among the Ten Commandments. You'll surely find both of these among the teachings of nearly every other religion as well.

It is absurd to deny the role of religion as a source and support for standards of morality that need to be upheld by secular authority.

If you think that the folks who wrote and ratified the 14th intended to invent the Institution of Gay Marriage, that's certainly a different opinion than that of Moore.

There is nothing "disgusting" or "sickening" about making legal arguments before the courts.

If you sincerely think that Roy's motivation is not religious, you very well could be the biggest moron in board history. Don't think that is the case though. You are just willing to stoop to whatever level of feigned ignorance to try and maintain a sh1theel stance.

Regardless of whether his argument is based on religion or not, you cannot deny the fact that Mr. Moore is absolutely right.

The authors of the Fourteenth Amendment certainly did not intend it to establish sick mockeries of marriage and family as being in any way comparable to genuine marriage and family. In fact, I think it is safe to say that if they ever imagined that the Amendment they were writing might ever be twisted in such a manner, that they would have included language to explicitly disclaim this interpretation.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Roy Moron is a narrow minded bigot and religious fanatic.

That's what you think about any Christian, and about anyone who holds to an vestige of decent moral values.

Being outright evil, you hate anyone who is not evil.

You are more of a bigot that your wildest, most depraved false accusations make anyone else to be.

Your horseshit is getting real old Blaylock. Get a fucking grip!

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Roy Moron is a narrow minded bigot and religious fanatic.

That's what you think about any Christian, and about anyone who holds to an vestige of decent moral values.

Being outright evil, you hate anyone who is not evil.

You are more of a bigot that your wildest, most depraved false accusations make anyone else to be.

Your horseshit is getting real old Blaylock. Get a fucking grip!

Hey...that's a candidate for the rebuttal of the year.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Your horseshit is getting real old Blaylock. Get a f•••ing grip!

Your insane rantings against anyone who is religious, or anyone who stands for any sort of decent moral values, is getting old.

It's like you're a one-trick brony. You start thread after thread after thread, advocating positions that are insane, that are immoral, that are outright evil; spend the rest of the thread making personal attacks against anyone who dares to disagree with you; and then, ultimately end up wondering why your thread turned into a shitstorm. And then you start another thread, with exactly the same result. It's reminiscent of the classic cliché about insanity being defined as doing what has been done before, and expecting a different result.

I have no idea what happened to you, what choices you've made, to turn you into such a bitter, hateful, bigoted, evil old freak, so deeply dedicated to hatred toward anything that is good or wholesome, so dedicated to spreading lies and hatred and madness and evil; and to be blunt, I don't give a f•••. You are what you are, and at your age, it's unlikely you'll change, that you'll in any way be redeemed.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Your horseshit is getting real old Blaylock. Get a f•••ing grip!

Your insane rantings against anyone who is religious, or anyone who stands for any sort of decent moral values, is getting old.

It's like you're a one-trick brony. You start thread after thread after thread, advocating positions that are insane, that are immoral, that are outright evil; spend the rest of the thread making personal attacks against anyone who dares to disagree with you; and then, ultimately end up wondering why your thread turned into a shitstorm. And then you start another thread, with exactly the same result. It's reminiscent of the classic cliché about insanity being defined as doing what has been done before, and expecting a different result.

I have no idea what happened to you, what choices you've made, to turn you into such a bitter, hateful, bigoted, evil old freak, so deeply dedicated to hatred toward anything that is good or wholesome, so dedicated to spreading lies and hatred and madness and evil; and to be blunt, I don't give a f•••. You are what you are, and at your age, it's unlikely you'll change, that you'll in any way be redeemed.

Update: Roy Moore is not the only crazed piece of shit out there trying to take away the RIGHT of gays to marry

On Anniversary Of Obergefell, Anti-LGBTQ Activists Demand Public Officials Defy Supreme Court | Right Wing Watch

Just before hundreds of people gathered on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington to protest the court’s affirmation of President Trump’s

www.rightwingwatch.org

Peter LaBarbera Is Upset ‘Love, Simon’ Did Not Mention The ‘Judgment Of God’ On Gay People | Right Wing Watch

Anti-LGBTQ activist Peter LaBarbera was, unsurprisingly, not a fan of the new gay teenage romance film “Love, Simon,” complaining to Religious Right radio

www.rightwingwatch.org

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

And then there is this:

Supreme Court's same-sex marriage ruling turns 5: Acceptance, advancement, but opposition remains

The LGBTQ community faces continued challenges from religious objectors, ranging from adoption and foster care to the rights of transgender people.

www.usatoday.com

But despite gains in legal rights, economic status, public acceptance and emotional well-being, the LGBTQ community faces continued challenges from the Trump administration and religious groups in areas ranging from adoption and foster care to the rights of transgender people to join the military or use the bathroom that corresponds with their gender identity.

"

This sometimes feels to me like the last roar of the dinosaurs," Hillary Goodridge says. By contrast, she says, “once you go to a same-sex wedding, it’s hard to fire the person for being gay the next day.”

Now vice president of appellate advocacy at Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group, Bursch is among those who still define marriage as between one man and one woman and continue to defend the rights of religious opponents.

"You may see all of this walked back," he warns of the legal gains made by the LGBTQ movement in recent years. "Eventually, it’s not love that wins. It’s truth that wins."

Listen to this damned fool! It's not love that wins.??Has he ever actually loved anyone.? What truth does he speak of?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Roy Moore is not the only crazed piece of shit out there trying to take away the RIGHT of gays to marry

There is, and can be, no such “right”.

Marriage always has been,and will always be, by definition, between a man and a woman. Mankind does not have the power to change this.

There can no more be any “right” to marriage between two people of the same sex, then there can be a “right” for two plus two to equal ten.

It is pure madness to claim otherwise.

The only thing you demonstrate by spouting this bullshit is to show everyone how severely you are fucked up in the head and fucked up in whatever residue remains, if any at all, of the soul that you might once have had.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

If gays want their marriages left alone they should leave everyone else alone. Not everyone wants to be part of the celebration of your love. Keep it to yourself and those who care.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Update; this case is dead in the water

Justices Thomas and Alito lash out at the decision that cleared way for same-sex marriage

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, lashed out on Monday at the religious liberty implications of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision that cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide.

www.cnn.com

The case that prompted Thomas' statement concerned Kim Davis, a former county clerk in Kentucky who gained national attention in 2015 and was jailed after declining to issue marriage licenses out of an objection to same sex marriages. The high court on Monday declined to hear an appeal in her case.

Thomas called Davis "one of the first victims" of the court's "cavalier treatment of religion" in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision but warned "she will not be the last." He said that her case was not properly presented before the court, but he urged his colleagues to revisit the religious liberty implications of the landmark opinion down the road.

 

[miketx]

Update; this case is dead in the water

Justices Thomas and Alito lash out at the decision that cleared way for same-sex marriage

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, lashed out on Monday at the religious liberty implications of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision that cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide.

www.cnn.com

The case that prompted Thomas' statement concerned Kim Davis, a former county clerk in Kentucky who gained national attention in 2015 and was jailed after declining to issue marriage licenses out of an objection to same sex marriages. The high court on Monday declined to hear an appeal in her case.

Thomas called Davis "one of the first victims" of the court's "cavalier treatment of religion" in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision but warned "she will not be the last." He said that his it uou er case was not properly presented before the court, but he urged his colleagues to revisit the religious liberty implications of the landmark opinion down the road.

Why is it you only post in threads about faggots or child molesters?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Update; this case is dead in the water

Justices Thomas and Alito lash out at the decision that cleared way for same-sex marriage

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, lashed out on Monday at the religious liberty implications of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision that cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide.

www.cnn.com

The case that prompted Thomas' statement concerned Kim Davis, a former county clerk in Kentucky who gained national attention in 2015 and was jailed after declining to issue marriage licenses out of an objection to same sex marriages. The high court on Monday declined to hear an appeal in her case.

Thomas called Davis "one of the first victims" of the court's "cavalier treatment of religion" in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision but warned "she will not be the last." He said that his it uou er case was not properly presented before the court, but he urged his colleagues to revisit the religious liberty implications of the landmark opinion down the road.

Why is it you only post in threads about faggots or child molesters?

You think that is all I do because it is the only place that you hang out so you have no fucking idea what I do.

 

[Polishprince]

Update; this case is dead in the water

Justices Thomas and Alito lash out at the decision that cleared way for same-sex marriage

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, lashed out on Monday at the religious liberty implications of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision that cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide.

www.cnn.com

The case that prompted Thomas' statement concerned Kim Davis, a former county clerk in Kentucky who gained national attention in 2015 and was jailed after declining to issue marriage licenses out of an objection to same sex marriages. The high court on Monday declined to hear an appeal in her case.

Thomas called Davis "one of the first victims" of the court's "cavalier treatment of religion" in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision but warned "she will not be the last." He said that his it uou er case was not properly presented before the court, but he urged his colleagues to revisit the religious liberty implications of the landmark opinion down the road.

Why is it you only post in threads about faggots or child molesters?

The Child Molester vote is very important this year, as liberals have successfully pushed to win the Chomo-Americans as well as other criminal classes the franchise. Did Nambla give their official endorsement to Sleepy Joe yet?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

‘Thomas wrote that the decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, "enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss."’ ibid

Ignorant, wrongheaded nonsense.

No one is being ‘branded’ as bigots.

The issue had solely to do with marriage as secular contract law – a law same-sex couples are eligible to participate in – having nothing to do whatsoever with religion or religious beliefs.

Religious entities that believe marriage is between only a man and a woman remain at liberty to deny religious marriage rituals to same-sex couples; there are no religious liberty concerns.

It is settled, accepted 14th Amendment jurisprudence that the states cannot use religion or religious beliefs to ‘justify’ denying citizens access to state law, such as same-sex couples or interracial couples to marriage law.