Justices Indicate Shadow-Bias: Gay Marriage Question Erodes Last Bastion of Impariality?

[mdk]

Actually the entire ruling is crucial.

The 56 times in 26 pages in Windsor that the Court affirmed marriage under the question of "gay marriage" was the ultimate authority of the states, notwithstanding I suppose? You're right, one should pay attention to the entire Ruling..

I agree, one should pay attention to the whole ruling and the Windsor ruling declared states marriage laws are subject to constitutional guarantees. Odd that you would leave that out in a post where you implore others to pay attention to an entire ruling. You have this hysterical habit of chiding others for behaviors that you yourself consistently display.

 

[Syriusly]

And not once that State marriage laws trump constitutional guarantees. But instead, that state marriage laws are subject to constitutional guarantees.

You keep ignoring this. The court won't.

Will the Court pay as close attention to the Prince's Trust study too? Or will their attention be cut away from the voices of the voteless children yet to be born into time unseen? Their attention will suddenly wander then?
e

I already gave you the address of the Supreme Court for you to send the Prince's Trust Study to.

And I give you permission to send it to the Supreme Court.

I am confident the Court will give your documents the attention that they so deserve.

 

[Silhouette]

I already gave you the address of the Supreme Court for you to send the Prince's Trust Study to.

And I give you permission to send it to the Supreme Court.

I am confident the Court will give your documents the attention that they so deserve.

You give me permission? Y'all are kind of getting full of yourselves these days aren't you? Hitler probably felt it necessary to give permission to people to do things too...like all fascist dictators feel about their omnipotence.

 

[Syriusly]

I already gave you the address of the Supreme Court for you to send the Prince's Trust Study to.

And I give you permission to send it to the Supreme Court.

I am confident the Court will give your documents the attention that they so deserve.

You give me permission? Y'all are kind of getting full of yourselves these days aren't you? Hitler probably felt it necessary to give permission to people to do things too...like all fascist dictators feel about their omnipotence.

You show me where Hitler gave you permission to hate homosexuals, and I will be impressed.

Meanwhile- get busy getting those reports to the Supreme Court like you threatened to.

 

[Silhouette]

You show me where Hitler gave you permission to hate homosexuals, and I will be impressed.

Meanwhile- get busy getting those reports to the Supreme Court like you threatened to.

I don't consider informing judges of the concerns of children in this marriage debate a "threat". Odd that you would. Duly noted, the Prince's Trust survey findings have you a bit rattled..

 

[Syriusly]

You show me where Hitler gave you permission to hate homosexuals, and I will be impressed.

Meanwhile- get busy getting those reports to the Supreme Court like you threatened to.

I don't consider informing judges of the concerns of children in this marriage debate a "threat". Odd that you would. Duly noted, the Prince's Trust survey findings have you a bit rattled..

No- indeed- I implore you to send the Prince's Trust survey to the Supreme Court as you threatened to do- send it with my permission- send it with my blessing- you can send it to them with chocolate if you want.

You keep asking what the Supreme Court will do when they read it- if you don't send it to them- they never will.

 

[Silhouette]

See this is the point of this thread. It surely seems like your ilk has it all wrapped up. Now you even know that the Supremes won't read the largest survey on young adults reporting how hard it is for them growing up without their gender as a role model. Seeing as how a gay marriage would supply a deficit in that department 50% of the time, I'd say the Supremes might be tempted to glance at it. You like to say they are all about the welfare of children. Yet you're just as sure that the largest study concerning singular gender "marriage" or just single genders raising children, showing how that is detrimental to them, "just isn't to be bothered with in this question".

You don't give a damn about child welfare. If you did, you would be willing to sacrafice for the sake of children. But the Prince's Trust study gains nothing but your scathing dismissal of it. It is as if you are mocking these 2,000+ young adults that report all manner of suffering as a result of not having their same gender as a role model growing up.

That's an odd position for someone petitioning the Court to "consider the immediate harm to children (but definitely don't be thinking of the long term harm to them!)"...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

See this is the point of this thread. It surely seems like your ilk has it all wrapped up. Now you even know that the Supremes won't read the largest survey on young adults reporting how hard it is for them growing up without their gender as a role model. Seeing as how a gay marriage would supply a deficit in that department 50% of the time, I'd say the Supremes might be tempted to glance at it. You like to say they are all about the welfare of children. Yet you're just as sure that the largest study concerning singular gender "marriage" or just single genders raising children, showing how that is detrimental to them, "just isn't to be bothered with in this question".

You don't give a damn about child welfare. If you did, you would be willing to sacrafice for the sake of children. But the Prince's Trust study gains nothing but your scathing dismissal of it. It is as if you are mocking these 2,000+ young adults that report all manner of suffering as a result of not having their same gender as a role model growing up.

That's an odd position for someone petitioning the Court to "consider the immediate harm to children (but definitely don't be thinking of the long term harm to them!)"...

The point of this thread is to exhibit how ridiculous you are – although that was likely not your intent.

 

[mdk]

See this is the point of this thread. It surely seems like your ilk has it all wrapped up. Now you even know that the Supremes won't read the largest survey on young adults reporting how hard it is for them growing up without their gender as a role model. Seeing as how a gay marriage would supply a deficit in that department 50% of the time, I'd say the Supremes might be tempted to glance at it. You like to say they are all about the welfare of children. Yet you're just as sure that the largest study concerning singular gender "marriage" or just single genders raising children, showing how that is detrimental to them, "just isn't to be bothered with in this question".

You don't give a damn about child welfare. If you did, you would be willing to sacrafice for the sake of children. But the Prince's Trust study gains nothing but your scathing dismissal of it. It is as if you are mocking these 2,000+ young adults that report all manner of suffering as a result of not having their same gender as a role model growing up.

That's an odd position for someone petitioning the Court to "consider the immediate harm to children (but definitely don't be thinking of the long term harm to them!)"...

The reason we mock and dismiss The Prince's Trust study b/c it no way supports your assertion and literally has nothing to do with gay marriage or gay parenting. You are going to have to do a hell of a lot better than a meaningless study, longs lines at Chick-fil-A, and, "likes" on Facebook.

 

[Silhouette]

The Prince's Trust study is about the detrimental effects young adults are self-reporting (the largest survey of its kind) about missing their own gender as a role model.

It most certainly does involve "gay marriage" 50% of the time..

 

[Syriusly]

You don't give a damn about child welfare. If you did, you would be willing to sacrafice for the sake of children. \.

No that would be you.

Me- a father and husband- who actually children in his life- unlike yourself- actually cares about children.

And gay marriage doesn't change whether or not homosexuals have children- they do have children- preventing gay marriage only ensures that their children will be harmed by not having married parents.

And since you just don't give a damn about them- you don't give a damn about children.

 

[Syriusly]

The Prince's Trust study is about the detrimental effects young adults are self-reporting (the largest survey of its kind) about missing their own gender as a role model.

It most certainly does involve "gay marriage" 50% of the time..

Doesn't mention gay marriage- we don't even know if there were any gay people in the study- since it never mentions them.

Just your usual lies.

 

[Syriusly]

See this is the point of this thread. It surely seems like your ilk has it all wrapped up. Now you even know that the Supremes won't read the largest survey on young adults reporting how hard it is for them growing up without their gender as a role model. Seeing as how a gay marriage would supply a deficit in that department 50% of the time, I'd say the Supremes might be tempted to glance at it. You like to say they are all about the welfare of children. Yet you're just as sure that the largest study concerning singular gender "marriage" or just single genders raising children, showing how that is detrimental to them, "just isn't to be bothered with in this question".

You don't give a damn about child welfare. If you did, you would be willing to sacrafice for the sake of children. But the Prince's Trust study gains nothing but your scathing dismissal of it. It is as if you are mocking these 2,000+ young adults that report all manner of suffering as a result of not having their same gender as a role model growing up.

That's an odd position for someone petitioning the Court to "consider the immediate harm to children (but definitely don't be thinking of the long term harm to them!)"...

No one is stopping you from sending the study to the Supreme Court- I have given you my permission- stand up for what you believe in Silhouette- go for it!

 

[Silhouette]

Well I already have, haven't I? It's why you keep spamming any reference or links to the Prince's Trust survey off of any page or thread it shows up on.

Here they are again. Let's see Skylar, mdk and the others chime in to make it look like it's not just you spamming this vital information about children growing up horribly without a role model of their gender (50% of the time in gay marriage) that should be weighed at the upcoming Hearing:

http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf
Teens without parent role model are 67 per cent less likely to get a job Daily Mail Online

 

[Syriusly]

Well I already have, haven't I?e

You already have what Silly?

 

[mdk]

Well I already have, haven't I? It's why you keep spamming any reference or links to the Prince's Trust survey off of any page or thread it shows up on.

Here they are again. Let's see Skylar, mdk and the others chime in to make it look like it's not just you spamming this vital information about children growing up horribly without a role model of their gender (50% of the time in gay marriage) that should be weighed at the upcoming Hearing:

http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf
Teens without parent role model are 67 per cent less likely to get a job Daily Mail Online

What is there to spam? If anything, your study is entirely irrelevant to the topic. Why don't show us all the part of the study that mentions gay marriage or gay parenting? If you can't, which we both know you cannot, than this study is off topic.

 

[Silhouette]

http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf
Teens without parent role model are 67 per cent less likely to get a job Daily Mail Online

What is there to spam? If anything, your study is entirely irrelevant to the topic. Why don't show us all the part of the study that mentions gay marriage or gay parenting? If you can't, which we both know you cannot, than this study is off topic.

It's not "my study". It was a study, the largest of its kind, commissioned by the Prince's Trust fund.

The entire study IS about gay parents and gay parenting. The study's conclusion is that children who grow up without their same gender as an adult role model have serious psychological adjustment issues, depression, drug use, a general sense of not belonging and even suicides.

You would insist the study is only about children who grow up in single parent homes. I would suggest that a single parent home would be better than a gay one at least with two parents. Why? Because the single parent likely is still dating....still trying to make that child's gender matter. The gay home? The implied message every single day of that opposite gendered child? You NEVER matter. That's how kids process their self-image, through the view of themselves that adults give them.

50% of the time children in "gay marriage" would grow up with this damage to their psyche. Let me guess, I suppose this phenomenon wouldn't apply to this boy who "knew he was a girl" from the earliest of ages? (Look at the poor little guy's hands clamped over his genitals and the dirt all over the knees of his pink yoga pants) Boy Drugged By Lesbian Parents To Be A Girl US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[mdk]

http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf
Teens without parent role model are 67 per cent less likely to get a job Daily Mail Online

What is there to spam? If anything, your study is entirely irrelevant to the topic. Why don't show us all the part of the study that mentions gay marriage or gay parenting? If you can't, which we both know you cannot, than this study is off topic.

It's not "my study". It was a study, the largest of its kind, commissioned by the Prince's Trust fund.

The entire study IS about gay parents and gay parenting. The study's conclusion is that children who grow up without their same gender as an adult role model have serious psychological adjustment issues, depression, drug use, a general sense of not belonging and even suicides.

You would insist the study is only about children who grow up in single parent homes. I would suggest that a single parent home would be better than a gay one at least with two parents. Why? Because the single parent likely is still dating....still trying to make that child's gender matter. The gay home? The implied message every single day of that opposite gendered child? You NEVER matter. That's how kids process their self-image, through the view of themselves that adults give them.

50% of the time children in "gay marriage" would grow up with this damage to their psyche. Let me guess, I suppose this phenomenon wouldn't apply to this boy who "knew he was a girl" from the earliest of ages? (Look at the poor little guy's hands clamped over his genitals and the dirt all over the knees of his pink yoga pants) Boy Drugged By Lesbian Parents To Be A Girl US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

No, you've imagined it entirely that this study has anything to do with gay marriage and gay parents. No where in the Prince's Trust do they mention gay parents or gay marriage. You can try pretend otherwise so I can it fit your narrative but for those of us that actually read the study know otherwise.

Again, where in the study does it mention gay parents specifically? It doesn't but I don't expect you to admit that fact. Your narrative is far more important to you than having any credibility and honor. Watching you embarrass yourself is rather comical though.

 

[Silhouette]

Would you be opposed to the Justices reading copies of the Prince's Trust study before they render a decision on gay marriage?

 

[Syriusly]

http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf
Teens without parent role model are 67 per cent less likely to get a job Daily Mail Online

What is there to spam? If anything, your study is entirely irrelevant to the topic. Why don't show us all the part of the study that mentions gay marriage or gay parenting? If you can't, which we both know you cannot, than this study is off topic.

It's not "my study". It was a study, the largest of its kind, commissioned by the Prince's Trust fund.

The entire study IS about gay parents and gay parenting.

You better tell the Prince's trust about that- because they don't mention gay parents or gay parenting at all.

Or gay marriage.

That is all your invention.