- Aug 8, 2016
- 26,106
- 25,176
- 2,445
What is Legal is very, very, seldom Lawful.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So government should decide who can and can't get married? What else do you want big government to do? Geesh.
I know what else YOU want big government to do...gun control... (mdk doesn't want you bringing "what else" up right now...lol..)
Well except for the divorce part, that’s how the law stands in the most liberal state in the Union. California. That’s according to popular vote there twice & Windsor 2013; which Obergefell cited as authority & didn’t seek to overturn.Bring back Traditional marriage between one man and one women! Require that marriage be binding when two people have kids and make divorce next to impossible.
Every child deserves a dad and a mom.
Well except for the divorce part, that’s how the law stands in the most liberal state in the Union. California. That’s according to popular vote there twice & Windsor 2013; which Obergefell cited as authority & didn’t seek to overturn.Bring back Traditional marriage between one man and one women! Require that marriage be binding when two people have kids and make divorce next to impossible.
Every child deserves a dad and a mom.
America has been smokescreened. Gay marriage is only legal in those states that ratified it on their own. There is no power in the Constitution to arbitrarily uphold outside definition for some (gays) over state powers while just as arbitrarily denying it to others (polygamists etc) from that same federal powerhead.
None. Scalia was right. Obergefell is complete hogwash & couldn't stand a state’s legal challenge from any angle. It cited no authority that gave five judges power to partially overturn 50 states’ powers in Windsor to just favor homosexuals.
Loon #1. Gorsuch. Loon #2. Roberts. Loon #3. Alito. Loon #4. Thomas. Loon #5. Kavanaugh.With exception of a few loons and diehards, most Americans have moved onto more pressing issues facing this nation.
Loon #1. Gorsuch. Loon #2. Roberts. Loon #3. Alito. Loon #4. Thomas. Loon #5. Kavanaugh.With exception of a few loons and diehards, most Americans have moved onto more pressing issues facing this nation.
You think those “loons” are going to forget Scalia’s criticisms of Obergefell while ignoring that Windsorbstill exists in full force & effect?
Actually according to Windsor 2013 (which Obergefell did NOT seek to overturn) it is NOT legal in every state. Better check Windsor again because your memory is slipping. Use the link in the OP to find the 56 quotes from Windsor affirming that states define marriage and not the fed.Yes, it is really legal in every state. Time to get over it and find a new unhealthy obsession to fixate on.
You’ve said this exact same statement numerous times over the years and yet...
Move on already.
I have a question. Do you believe in gun control?
Mark
I repeat...
...Loon #1. Gorsuch. Loon #2. Roberts. Loon #3. Alito. Loon #4. Thomas. Loon #5. Kavanaugh....
You think those “loons” are going to forget Scalia’s criticisms of Obergefell while ignoring that Windsor still exists in full force & effect?
I have a question. Do you believe in gun control?
Mark
What does gay marriage have to do with gun control?
I have a question. Do you believe in gun control?
Mark
What does gay marriage have to do with gun control?
It's what mdk's hypocrisy has to do with the conversation more like. zephyr's post meant to out mdk as a hypocrite because mdk supports states overriding the federal 2nd Amendment at the same time mdk supports the fed USSC overriding states' sovereignty (Windsor 2013) in defining which lifestyles may or may not marry in their boundaries.
Well see, Windsor says it isn't. So which is dominant? Windsor or Obergefell that...oops! ...cited Windsor. There is an unworkable conflict of declaration of state vs federal powers on marriage between Windsor and Obergefell. So a challenge will have to decide if the fed can, after all, dictate how marriage is going to be to the individual states. Because Windsor said it couldn't and Obergefell (Ironically, citing Windsor) said it could.Yes it's legal in every state. Why does it bother you so much? Gays and lesbians are going to fuck regardless. How does them getting married effect you?
Nice of you to post a gif animation of what you will look like when Windsor is cited as justification for state sovereignty on the definition of marriage.
Nice of you to post a gif animation of what you will look like when Windsor is cited as justification for state sovereignty on the definition of marriage.
Do you believe polygamists have a right to marry after Obergefell? Or is the 14th Amendment an arbitrary Amendment on which lifestyles get privileges?
Well marriage is a contract between two people, many gays have done this with a LLC and it works better. If for some reason it allows the LLC to be null and void, with no one getting hurt. Marriage contract is a messy one and bad to break.Actually according to Windsor 2013 (which Obergefell did NOT seek to overturn) it is NOT legal in every state. Better check Windsor again because your memory is slipping. Use the link in the OP to find the 56 quotes from Windsor affirming that states define marriage and not the fed.Yes, it is really legal in every state. Time to get over it and find a new unhealthy obsession to fixate on.
In California for instance, gay marriage is not legal according to Windsor 2013. So, unless you're saying Windsor was overturned by Obergefell (which you know it wasn't and the opposite is true: Obergefell cited it as an authority), gay marriage is ILLEGAL in CA and many other states.
One state. That's all it takes for standing. You're a stickler for standing, right mdk? Or is that your buddy Skylar?