Opponents Invoke Justice Kennedy's Words Against Him in Same-Sex Marriage Clash

[Vigilante]

The pro-gay rights rulings of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy have been a key spark in the march toward legalized gay marriage. To counter the trend, same-sex marriage opponents now are seizing upon other opinions by Kennedy. It was Kennedy who last month defended the right of voters to decide sensitive issues, in a ruling that upheld Michigan's ban on taking race into account in college admissions. At least five states have invoked Kennedy's opinion in the Michigan case to argue that voters and elected officials, not judges, should choose whether same-sex couples can be married or have their marriages...

http://www.newsmax.com/ ^

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

The pro-gay rights rulings of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy have been a key spark in the march toward legalized gay marriage. To counter the trend, same-sex marriage opponents now are seizing upon other opinions by Kennedy. It was Kennedy who last month defended the right of voters to decide sensitive issues, in a ruling that upheld Michigan's ban on taking race into account in college admissions. At least five states have invoked Kennedy's opinion in the Michigan case to argue that voters and elected officials, not judges, should choose whether same-sex couples can be married or have their marriages...

http://www.newsmax.com/ ^

Sorry, you don't get to "vote" on someone's civil rights.

In every genuine democracy today, majority rule is both endorsed and limited by the supreme law of the constitution, which protects the rights of individuals. Tyranny by minority over the majority is barred, but so is tyranny of the majority against minorities


Majority rule is limited in order to protect minority rights, because if it were unchecked it probably would be used to oppress persons holding unpopular views.

Unlimited majority rule in a democracy is potentially just as despotic as the unchecked rule of an autocrat or an elitist minority political party.

http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/g...minority-rights&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

.


How about posting some of your OWN thoughts to go along with your C&P?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

...same-sex marriage opponents now are seizing upon other opinions by Kennedy.

And succeeding in only exhibiting their ignorance of those opinions and Constitutional case law in general.

The Michigan measure concerning affirmative action did not constitute a violation of the Equal Protection Clause because it affords minorities ample other avenues to contest policies they consider discriminatory, including the right to file suit challenging the constitutionality of such measures in court.

That is not the case with same-sex couples’ access to marriage law.

State measures seeking to disallow same-sex couples access to marriage law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment because they single out gay Americans for exclusion absent a rational basis and lacking a proper legislative end, where same-sex couples are afforded no other means to access marriage law.

In Michigan minorities are still allowed access to the law to challenge discrimination; in states such as Utah same-sex couples are denied access to the law.

The opinions therefore have nothing to do with ‘respecting “states’ rights,”’ rather, the opinions concern whether the actions of the states comport with 14th Amendment jurisprudence, and those which fail to do so are invalidated accordingly, such as measures enacted to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law.

 

[Vigilante]

The pro-gay rights rulings of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy have been a key spark in the march toward legalized gay marriage. To counter the trend, same-sex marriage opponents now are seizing upon other opinions by Kennedy. It was Kennedy who last month defended the right of voters to decide sensitive issues, in a ruling that upheld Michigan's ban on taking race into account in college admissions. At least five states have invoked Kennedy's opinion in the Michigan case to argue that voters and elected officials, not judges, should choose whether same-sex couples can be married or have their marriages...

http://www.newsmax.com/ ^

Sorry, you don't get to "vote" on someone's civil rights.

In every genuine democracy today, majority rule is both endorsed and limited by the supreme law of the constitution, which protects the rights of individuals. Tyranny by minority over the majority is barred, but so is tyranny of the majority against minorities


Majority rule is limited in order to protect minority rights, because if it were unchecked it probably would be used to oppress persons holding unpopular views.

Unlimited majority rule in a democracy is potentially just as despotic as the unchecked rule of an autocrat or an elitist minority political party.

Annenberg Classroom - Glossary terms - Majority-rule-and-minority-rights

.


How about posting some of your OWN thoughts to go along with your C&P?

Very easy, who rights OUTWEIGH the others? Do people who are religious, have the right to follow their religions, are now forced to acquiesce to something that has been recognized by society for centuries to be aberrant, and perverted? Or do a group of people get to lead a vast amount of this society around by the nose?

I fall in the former category, you and the subversives fall in the latter. The real problem is that subversives use this insignificant issue as a wedge, like abortion, drug freedom, amnesty, and a host of other FRINGE movements to split this country apart. You subversives have learned Alinsky's laws well, and the teaching of ALL the dictators and subversives that have come before you.

You don't like being exposed for what you are, or probably, because you really aren't that bright, are being used as a useful pawn by others that can manipulate you.

Many of us have seen it happen before, and although the subversives have control of our education system, trying desperately to CHANGE history, another of "TELL A LIE LONG ENOUGH AND IT WILL BECOME TRUTH", for our young, and manipulating their youthful minds in the directions they want the future public to bend to, it will be hard for you.

Our young ,who are in the military, are still being shown the light, even with the Manchurian muslim PURGING over 200 of the TOP BRASS from it's ranks because they don't agree with his communist policies and agendas. How are we going to have a military to protect us when our young are taught "WEAKNESS IS STRENGTH" by a poser president?

As I've observed for decades now, this subversive agenda is all interconnected, and probably George Soros is ONE of MANY who fund this manipulation. Waiting on your intellectual answer....

 

[Vigilante]

...same-sex marriage opponents now are seizing upon other opinions by Kennedy.

And succeeding in only exhibiting their ignorance of those opinions and Constitutional case law in general.

The Michigan measure concerning affirmative action did not constitute a violation of the Equal Protection Clause because it affords minorities ample other avenues to contest policies they consider discriminatory, including the right to file suit challenging the constitutionality of such measures in court.

That is not the case with same-sex couples’ access to marriage law.

State measures seeking to disallow same-sex couples access to marriage law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment because they single out gay Americans for exclusion absent a rational basis and lacking a proper legislative end, where same-sex couples are afforded no other means to access marriage law.

In Michigan minorities are still allowed access to the law to challenge discrimination; in states such as Utah same-sex couples are denied access to the law.

The opinions therefore have nothing to do with ‘respecting “states’ rights,”’ rather, the opinions concern whether the actions of the states comport with 14th Amendment jurisprudence, and those which fail to do so are invalidated accordingly, such as measures enacted to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law.

In YOUR opinion which means very little, shyster, except in here where you do have many subversives that think you know something! All that is need is 5 DECENT people to overthrow what you lefties have pushed on us since WW II.... our day will come!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Misapplication of Kennedy's other rulings.

K's opponents do not understand the Constitution and the 14th amendment, clearly.

For examples of such cluelessness, read Vigilante in this thread.

 

[bodecea]

The pro-gay rights rulings of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy have been a key spark in the march toward legalized gay marriage. To counter the trend, same-sex marriage opponents now are seizing upon other opinions by Kennedy. It was Kennedy who last month defended the right of voters to decide sensitive issues, in a ruling that upheld Michigan's ban on taking race into account in college admissions. At least five states have invoked Kennedy's opinion in the Michigan case to argue that voters and elected officials, not judges, should choose whether same-sex couples can be married or have their marriages...

http://www.newsmax.com/ ^

Sorry, you don't get to "vote" on someone's civil rights.

In every genuine democracy today, majority rule is both endorsed and limited by the supreme law of the constitution, which protects the rights of individuals. Tyranny by minority over the majority is barred, but so is tyranny of the majority against minorities


Majority rule is limited in order to protect minority rights, because if it were unchecked it probably would be used to oppress persons holding unpopular views.

Unlimited majority rule in a democracy is potentially just as despotic as the unchecked rule of an autocrat or an elitist minority political party.

Annenberg Classroom - Glossary terms - Majority-rule-and-minority-rights

.


How about posting some of your OWN thoughts to go along with your C&P?

Very easy, who rights OUTWEIGH the others? Do people who are religious, have the right to follow their religions, are now forced to acquiesce to something that has been recognized by society for centuries to be aberrant, and perverted? Or do a group of people get to lead a vast amount of this society around by the nose?

I fall in the former category, you and the subversives fall in the latter. The real problem is that subversives use this insignificant issue as a wedge, like abortion, drug freedom, amnesty, and a host of other FRINGE movements to split this country apart. You subversives have learned Alinsky's laws well, and the teaching of ALL the dictators and subversives that have come before you.

You don't like being exposed for what you are, or probably, because you really aren't that bright, are being used as a useful pawn by others that can manipulate you.

Many of us have seen it happen before, and although the subversives have control of our education system, trying desperately to CHANGE history, another of "TELL A LIE LONG ENOUGH AND IT WILL BECOME TRUTH", for our young, and manipulating their youthful minds in the directions they want the future public to bend to, it will be hard for you.

Our young ,who are in the military, are still being shown the light, even with the Manchurian muslim PURGING over 200 of the TOP BRASS from it's ranks because they don't agree with his communist policies and agendas. How are we going to have a military to protect us when our young are taught "WEAKNESS IS STRENGTH" by a poser president?

As I've observed for decades now, this subversive agenda is all interconnected, and probably George Soros is ONE of MANY who fund this manipulation. Waiting on your intellectual answer....

What rights are being taken away from religious people? Are their marriages being taken away?

 

[bodecea]

...same-sex marriage opponents now are seizing upon other opinions by Kennedy.

And succeeding in only exhibiting their ignorance of those opinions and Constitutional case law in general.

The Michigan measure concerning affirmative action did not constitute a violation of the Equal Protection Clause because it affords minorities ample other avenues to contest policies they consider discriminatory, including the right to file suit challenging the constitutionality of such measures in court.

That is not the case with same-sex couples’ access to marriage law.

State measures seeking to disallow same-sex couples access to marriage law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment because they single out gay Americans for exclusion absent a rational basis and lacking a proper legislative end, where same-sex couples are afforded no other means to access marriage law.

In Michigan minorities are still allowed access to the law to challenge discrimination; in states such as Utah same-sex couples are denied access to the law.

The opinions therefore have nothing to do with ‘respecting “states’ rights,”’ rather, the opinions concern whether the actions of the states comport with 14th Amendment jurisprudence, and those which fail to do so are invalidated accordingly, such as measures enacted to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law.

In YOUR opinion which means very little, shyster, except in here where you do have many subversives that think you know something! All that is need is 5 DECENT people to overthrow what you lefties have pushed on us since WW II.... our day will come!

Ooooo! Scary!