Is Anyone Else Getting Tired Of The Queer Agenda???

[Seawytch]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court. But since you've never read the Constitution, you have no idea what is and what is not, unconstitutional.

Which is exactly what they did in Loving and Obergefell. Anti Miscegenation and anti gay laws violated the Constitution.

Now you know. You're welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Syriusly]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court.

So we are in agreement- the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn unconstitutional state marriage laws- just as it has done 4 times now- just as even Justice Scalia voted in Turner v. Safely.

Great- so now we are in agreement that the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn an unconstitutional state marriage law, you are just left disagreeing with the courts over the marriage rights of Americans who are gay.

Let us know how that goes.

 

[P@triot]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court. But since you've never read the Constitution, you have no idea what is and what is not, unconstitutional.

Which is exactly what they did in Loving and Obergefell. Anti Miscegenation and anti gay laws violated the Constitution. Now you know. You're welcome.

And for the 300,000th time stupid, the federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers (i.e. responsibilities) and marriage is not one of them stupid. Therefore, marriage is the responsibility of the states. And each can decide for themselves to redefine marriage or not.

With each post you become more desperate to make your case you sound more irrational and ignorant. Why is it so hard for you to remember 18 simple powers and that marriage is not one of them. If you can't come up with a case within those parameters, then you have no case, stupid.

Being your attorney is a full time job. You need even the most basic legal concepts explained to you. Do you have any idea how sad that is? Did you drop out of school in junior high?!?

 

[P@triot]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court.

So we are in agreement- the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn unconstitutional state marriage laws- just as it has done 4 times now- just as even Justice Scalia voted in Turner v. Safely.

Great- so now we are in agreement that the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn an unconstitutional state marriage law, you are just left disagreeing with the courts over the marriage rights of Americans who are gay.

Let us know how that goes.

There was nothing "unconstitutional" about state marriage laws. It is there right to decide for themselves whether or not they want to redefine marriage. If California decides that they will not recognize homosexual marriages, that is 100% constitutional. If Vermont decided that they will recognize homosexual marriage, that too is 100% constitutional. What is not constitutional is for the federal government to decide for the states or for the Supreme Court to create law from the bench and force all 50 states to accept gay marriage.

You and wytchy should really attend some night classes at your local community colleges because it is painful explain the basics to you day in and day out. You don't even have a basic foundation of the U.S. Constitution or our structure of government.

 

[Syriusly]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court.

So we are in agreement- the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn unconstitutional state marriage laws- just as it has done 4 times now- just as even Justice Scalia voted in Turner v. Safely.

Great- so now we are in agreement that the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn an unconstitutional state marriage law, you are just left disagreeing with the courts over the marriage rights of Americans who are gay.

Let us know how that goes.

There was nothing "unconstitutional" about state marriage laws. .

And of course that is your opinion- and yes- 4 other Supreme Court justices agree with you.

And 5 Supreme Court justices disagree with you.

And that is why the unconstitutional state laws were overturned.

 

[Syriusly]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court. But since you've never read the Constitution, you have no idea what is and what is not, unconstitutional.

Which is exactly what they did in Loving and Obergefell. Anti Miscegenation and anti gay laws violated the Constitution. Now you know. You're welcome.

And for the 300,000th time stupid, the federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers (i.e. responsibilities) and marriage is not one of them stupid. Therefore, marriage is the responsibility of the states. And each can decide for themselves to redefine marriage or not.

States have the responsibility to regulate marriage- but such regulations must be constitutional.

Not even Anthony Scalia agrees with you.

After all- he overturned a State marriage regulation in Turner v. Safely.

As I have pointed out before- the Supreme Court has overturned State marriage laws as unconstitutional 4 times now- and Obergefell is the only one that even had a close vote.

And the States obey the authority of the Supreme Court.

 

[Seawytch]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court. But since you've never read the Constitution, you have no idea what is and what is not, unconstitutional.

Which is exactly what they did in Loving and Obergefell. Anti Miscegenation and anti gay laws violated the Constitution. Now you know. You're welcome.

And for the 300,000th time stupid, the federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers (i.e. responsibilities) and marriage is not one of them stupid. Therefore, marriage is the responsibility of the states. And each can decide for themselves to redefine marriage or not.

With each post you become more desperate to make your case you sound more irrational and ignorant. Why is it so hard for you to remember 18 simple powers and that marriage is not one of them. If you can't come up with a case within those parameters, then you have no case, stupid.

Being your attorney is a full time job. You need even the most basic legal concepts explained to you. Do you have any idea how sad that is? Did you drop out of school in junior high?!?

Ninth Amendment: Non-Enumerated Rights Retained by People

Again, you're welcome for all this free education you're getting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Syriusly]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court.

So we are in agreement- the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn unconstitutional state marriage laws- just as it has done 4 times now- just as even Justice Scalia voted in Turner v. Safely.

Great- so now we are in agreement that the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn an unconstitutional state marriage law, you are just left disagreeing with the courts over the marriage rights of Americans who are gay.

Let us know how that goes.

You and wytchy should really attend some night classes at your local community colleges because it is painful explain the basics to you day in and day out. You don't even have a basic foundation of the U.S. Constitution or our structure of government.

Meanwhile- we are the ones pointing out the reality- that same gender couples can legally marry in all 50 states- because the states recognize the authority of the Supreme Court to overturn unconstitutional laws.

You are the one whining about how the Supreme Court can do what it has been doing for 50 years.

 

[P@triot]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court. But since you've never read the Constitution, you have no idea what is and what is not, unconstitutional.

Which is exactly what they did in Loving and Obergefell. Anti Miscegenation and anti gay laws violated the Constitution. Now you know. You're welcome.

And for the 300,000th time stupid, the federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers (i.e. responsibilities) and marriage is not one of them stupid. Therefore, marriage is the responsibility of the states. And each can decide for themselves to redefine marriage or not.

With each post you become more desperate to make your case you sound more irrational and ignorant. Why is it so hard for you to remember 18 simple powers and that marriage is not one of them. If you can't come up with a case within those parameters, then you have no case, stupid.

Being your attorney is a full time job. You need even the most basic legal concepts explained to you. Do you have any idea how sad that is? Did you drop out of school in junior high?!?

Ninth Amendment: Non-Enumerated Rights Retained by People

Again, you're welcome for all this free education you're getting.

You've spent your life parroting libtard propaganda. Now you've spent this entire thread parroting me. Do you have a single original thought in that tiny brain of yours? Even one?

By the way - you're 9th Amendent (which you just googled and never heard of before today) further proves you're wrong. The people have the right to decide for themselves whether their state will redefine marriage or not. Your precious libtard state of California even rejected it because even that stupid ass state had the common sense to realize how damaging redefining marriage is.

I know you want to play Hitler and shove your fucked up views down the throats of the American people but it simply doesn't work that way sweetie. You're free to be gay, we're free to reject your homosexuality. That's how it works.

 

[P@triot]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court.

So we are in agreement- the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn unconstitutional state marriage laws- just as it has done 4 times now- just as even Justice Scalia voted in Turner v. Safely.

Great- so now we are in agreement that the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn an unconstitutional state marriage law, you are just left disagreeing with the courts over the marriage rights of Americans who are gay.

Let us know how that goes.

You and wytchy should really attend some night classes at your local community colleges because it is painful explain the basics to you day in and day out. You don't even have a basic foundation of the U.S. Constitution or our structure of government.

Meanwhile- we are the ones pointing out the reality- that same gender couples can legally marry in all 50 states- because the states recognize the authority of the Supreme Court to overturn unconstitutional laws.

You are the one whining about how the Supreme Court can do what it has been doing for 50 years.

Even the Supreme Court didn't "recognize" that. I proved as much in the dissenting opinion of Antonin Scalia (as well as Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito).

Of course, you're free in America to make shit up but it just makes you look really stupid.

 

[Syriusly]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court. But since you've never read the Constitution, you have no idea what is and what is not, unconstitutional.

Which is exactly what they did in Loving and Obergefell. Anti Miscegenation and anti gay laws violated the Constitution. Now you know. You're welcome.

And for the 300,000th time stupid, the federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers (i.e. responsibilities) and marriage is not one of them stupid. Therefore, marriage is the responsibility of the states. And each can decide for themselves to redefine marriage or not.

With each post you become more desperate to make your case you sound more irrational and ignorant. Why is it so hard for you to remember 18 simple powers and that marriage is not one of them. If you can't come up with a case within those parameters, then you have no case, stupid.

Being your attorney is a full time job. You need even the most basic legal concepts explained to you. Do you have any idea how sad that is? Did you drop out of school in junior high?!?

Ninth Amendment: Non-Enumerated Rights Retained by People

Again, you're welcome for all this free education you're getting.

I know you want to play Hitlers.

 

[Syriusly]

You still haven't found a single Supreme Court justice who has supported your position that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn unconstitutional laws.

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court.

So we are in agreement- the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn unconstitutional state marriage laws- just as it has done 4 times now- just as even Justice Scalia voted in Turner v. Safely.

Great- so now we are in agreement that the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn an unconstitutional state marriage law, you are just left disagreeing with the courts over the marriage rights of Americans who are gay.

Let us know how that goes.

You and wytchy should really attend some night classes at your local community colleges because it is painful explain the basics to you day in and day out. You don't even have a basic foundation of the U.S. Constitution or our structure of government.

Meanwhile- we are the ones pointing out the reality- that same gender couples can legally marry in all 50 states- because the states recognize the authority of the Supreme Court to overturn unconstitutional laws.

You are the one whining about how the Supreme Court can do what it has been doing for 50 years.

Even the Supreme Court didn't "recognize" that. I proved as much in the dissenting opinion of Antonin Scalia (as well as Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito)..

The Supreme Court did recognize it- 5-4- and just like every other Supreme Court decision that overturned unconstitutional marriage laws- it is by majority- not the minority.

Same gender couples can marry in all 50 states- no matter how much you whine about it.

 

[P@triot]

States have the responsibility to regulate marriage- but such regulations must be constitutional.

Game over. Even you admit that the federal government has no authority over marriage. Therefore, an entity of the federal government cannot redefine marriage nor can they force one or more states to accept their view on marriages. It's simply outside of their Constitutional authority.

Not even Anthony Scalia agrees with you. After all- he overturned a State marriage regulation in Turner v. Safely.

Clearly he does. He said so in his dissenting opinion. Now you can desperately try to rewrite history all you want but unfortunately for you, all of his views and rulings are thoroughly documented. So all you're doing is obliterating your own credibility by lying.

(Psst....we're discussing Obergefell. Pointing to Turner is absurd and illustrates your desperation).

 

[P@triot]

I've tried to explain to you over and over that rejecting unconstitutional laws is the responsibility of the Supreme Court. But since you've never read the Constitution, you have no idea what is and what is not, unconstitutional.

Which is exactly what they did in Loving and Obergefell. Anti Miscegenation and anti gay laws violated the Constitution. Now you know. You're welcome.

And for the 300,000th time stupid, the federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers (i.e. responsibilities) and marriage is not one of them stupid. Therefore, marriage is the responsibility of the states. And each can decide for themselves to redefine marriage or not.

With each post you become more desperate to make your case you sound more irrational and ignorant. Why is it so hard for you to remember 18 simple powers and that marriage is not one of them. If you can't come up with a case within those parameters, then you have no case, stupid.

Being your attorney is a full time job. You need even the most basic legal concepts explained to you. Do you have any idea how sad that is? Did you drop out of school in junior high?!?

Ninth Amendment: Non-Enumerated Rights Retained by People

Again, you're welcome for all this free education you're getting.

I know you want to play Hitlers.

Well the left embraces everything about fascism. Government forcing people to Nazi goose-step in the same direction.

 

[P@triot]

Same gender couples can marry in all 50 states- no matter how much you whine about it.

For the moment they can. And it was 100% unconstitutional no matter how unaware of that fact you are.

 

[P@triot]

Yes D.S. - people are overwhelmingly tired of the queer agenda. Especially absurd nonsense like this... a national freaking monument to homosexuals because they rioted?!?! And why did they riot? For freedom? To stop tyranny? No....because they couldn't purchase a freaking beer. Oh the humanity!!! How can anyone live with being denied a beer?!?! They broke a law and restored to violence simply because they couldn't buy a mind-altering substance and Obama and the Dumbocrats want to put them in the same category as Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Rosa Parks?!?

Obama Designates Gay Bar As Latest National Monument - Breitbart

 

[Divine Wind]

Is Anyone Else Getting Tired Of The Queer Agenda???.....

I'm tired of the larger picture: Every fucking idiot who thinks they're the only ones on the planet deserving attention.

While there have been legitimate protests of injustice, the majority of protests have been by people using the "squeaky wheel" strategy to garner attention far exceeding what their situation warrants.

 

[theliq]

"Is Anyone Else Getting Tired Of The Queer Agenda???"

No, Americans have long ago grown tired of this sort of ignorance, fear, stupidity, bigotry, and hate directed at gay Americans.

And there is no ‘agenda,’ the notion is a delusional lie.

America has long grown tired of faggots/liberals and muslims telling them what to think. THAT'S what America is tired of.

Fair enough Fury....But pity us and the rest of the World...the Don has only been Pres., for a couple of weeks>>>>>>>And YES we Australians have already grown tired of his,Ignorance,Fear Mongering,Total Stupidity,Bigotry and hate directed at Muslims,Mexicans,Gays and importantly Women....But there IS an Agenda sadly it is built on his delusional Bullshit....just sayin...steve

 

[francoHFW]

"Is Anyone Else Getting Tired Of The Queer Agenda???"

No, Americans have long ago grown tired of this sort of ignorance, fear, stupidity, bigotry, and hate directed at gay Americans.

And there is no ‘agenda,’ the notion is a delusional lie.

America has long grown tired of faggots/liberals and muslims telling them what to think. THAT'S what America is tired of.

Fair enough Fury....But pity us and the rest of the World...the Don has only been Pres., for a couple of weeks>>>>>>>And YES we Australians have already grown tired of his,Ignorance,Fear Mongering,Total Stupidity,Bigotry and hate directed at Muslims,Mexicans,Gays and importantly Women....But there IS an Agenda sadly it is built on his delusional Bullshit....just sayin...steve

American ignoramuses and ugly American GOP a-holes like Fury that is...

 

[francoHFW]

Which is exactly what they did in Loving and Obergefell. Anti Miscegenation and anti gay laws violated the Constitution. Now you know. You're welcome.

And for the 300,000th time stupid, the federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers (i.e. responsibilities) and marriage is not one of them stupid. Therefore, marriage is the responsibility of the states. And each can decide for themselves to redefine marriage or not.

With each post you become more desperate to make your case you sound more irrational and ignorant. Why is it so hard for you to remember 18 simple powers and that marriage is not one of them. If you can't come up with a case within those parameters, then you have no case, stupid.

Being your attorney is a full time job. You need even the most basic legal concepts explained to you. Do you have any idea how sad that is? Did you drop out of school in junior high?!?

Ninth Amendment: Non-Enumerated Rights Retained by People

Again, you're welcome for all this free education you're getting.

I know you want to play Hitlers.

Well the left embraces everything about fascism. Government forcing people to Nazi goose-step in the same direction.

Tolerance you mean, hater. Enjoy hell. lol. Fascism is RW, dupe, DUH.