What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rat's Nest 2016: The 10 Brick Walls Gay Marriage Is Up Against: Collosal SCOTUS FAIL

Silhouette

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
25,815
Reaction score
1,928
Points
265
The problems with "gay marriage is constitutional" are these (at least and maybe more)

1. Kagan & Ginsburg both displayed rampant bias before Obergefell was heard. Caperton v A.T. Massey Coal 2009 says they were not allowed to preside over Obergefell. A Shortcut to Nixing The Gay Marriage Decision: Subtract Two Votes

2. The Judicial Branch of government cannot change the Constitution. Only Congress can do that. Creating a new inclusion in the 14th Amendment for "just some of the the Court's favorite repugnant deviant sex behaviors-as-identity but not others" violates the 14th's equality skeleton. Either all majority-repugnant deviant sex behaviors may be married, (think polygamy) or none of them may outside state laws.

3. There are no provisions in the federal government for regulating marriage: it belongs to the states. In fact, Windsor 2013 found that as fact 56 times in that Opinion's wording. States Have a Valid Legal Argument to Defy Gay Marriage Windsor's essence in fact was that DOMA should be dismantled precisely because marriage was up to New York where Windsor was "gay married"..I'll explain the quotation marks further down...

4. Marriage was a contract invented over a thousand years ago specifically to remedy the various situations where children found themselves without both a mother and father. Ergo, not only are children implicit partners in that contract, but the contract was invented and maintained for thousands of years FOR CHILDREN. The state gains no benefit from two adults shacking up. The state DOES gain benefit by enticing a mother and father for the sake of children's best shot at life. The woes without either a mother or father present for both genders of children are long understood, established, documented and simply also a matter of common sense. When the radical contract revision was proposed, children were not invited to the table. They had no representation in Obergefell; which was required by contract law.

5. If a contract involving minors either expressly or implicitly serves a need of theirs, the contract cannot be changed to their detriment. Even if children wanted to change it to their detriment, it cannot be done. Study the Infants Doctrine: ancient law. Even if the reason for changing the contract is pure compassion for adults, it still cannot stand if it is to the detriment of children involved.. Incidentally, Loving v Virginia did not change that thousands-years-old skeleton where races all over the world intermarried to provide a mother and father for children. So, gay marriage is nothing at all like Loving and may not cite it because the two (mother/father) & (man/man, woman/woman) are NOTHING alike with regards to marriage's original reason for being invented. Foundation of American Law at Risk: Obergefell 2015 A Reversible Ruling?

6. New York vs Ferber (1982) Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc. was a case about a guy Ferber who wanted to peddle kiddie porn, claiming the 1st Amendment supported his "right" to do so constitutionally. At first it was found that he could under the 1st, then it was found he could not. SCOTUS heard the case and even though SCOTUS rules in favor of free speech in even ridiculous and offensive cases as an unwavering rule, it found exception in NY v Ferber for one reason: children. The Court found that if a person exercises a constitutional right that somehow hurts children either physically or psychologically, then that right cannot be exercised. Gay marriage systematically strips boys of fathers and girls of mothers FOR LIFE without the possibility of parole from this mental prison. Infants and contract law has a clause that says if adults want to change a contract involving children, if there is even a shadow of a chance that change might hurt them, their new contract is VOID (not "voidable" but void upon its face). The burden is upon the adults to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that boys raised without fathers and girls raised without mothers does no harm to them. Citing "single parenthood" isn't allowed because we are talking about THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT, not other situations outside it. Marriage, remember, exists for a reason. So, "gay marriage" cannot be, because that new revision harms children in predictable ways. There is AT LEAST enough evidence to cast doubt on "the benefits of stripping a child of either a mother or father"..and so...gay marriage everywhere is void. Children cannot suffer as a convenience...or even an extension of compassion to adults...Marriage was and is for children.

7. Children caught up in gay lifestyles are unfortunate...as are children caught up in single parenthood and polygamy. So, if you use the logic that "children are being harmed by their parent(s) not receiving the official blessing of society, you cannot disinclude children of polygamy or of monosexuals (single parents).. So says the 14th.. Hetero divorce and single parenthood are actually more compassionate psychologically to children than gay marriage from a pure physical presentation. Divorce and single parents may again remarry...so the child still has hope that they will have the right combination of parents proven out to the best for their rounded adjustment to the adult world (that precise wording also including in "necessities" where infants and contracts are concerned). Gay marriage is an announcement to children caught up in that lifestyle "By this decree, we declare you will NEVER have a mother (or father) FOR LIFE." *Poof!* All hope gone. That little message will sink deep into the child's mind and fester as they approach adolescence and adulthood. For details on the results of that festering: PRINCE'S TRUST 2010 YOUTH INDEX SURVEY and ‘Quartet of Truth’: Adult children of gay parents testify against same-sex ‘marriage’ at 5th Circuit

8. Obergefell may have been a nice phasod...a lovely parade of compassion for adults wanting to shack up together...but since the most important people in marriage were not invited, nor had representation at that Hearing, Obergefell is void upon its face. That Opinion is void. It is an illegal opinion because of the Infants Doctrine and all the other points made herein.

9. Since Obergefell launched itself off of a false premise ("behavior-as-identity is as static as race"), Obergefell stands to unravel the foundation of American Law on all other fronts. Because once a minority behavior-as-identity repugnant to the majority gets special protection, the 14th says that all other behaviors repugnant to the majority must be free to do as they like as well. How will "bulimic-Americans" or "Polygamist-Americans" or "incest-Americans" or "Man-loving-boys Americans" be turned away? Yes, they are all repugnant...but so is gay marriage to the majority... And since there is no provision for the Constitution to regulate marriage, all other state laws are also wide open now to behaviors-as-identity wanting exception from them. Precedent can be a bitch..

10. Obergefell, since it is behavioral and not static (Anne Heche, prison gays etc. etc.)...and poorly understood at that (why are roughly half of all lesbians attracted to a strong "male" partner in the woman they're with? Why are roughly half of all gay men attracted to a servile, effeminant "female" partner in the man they're with?), is at best a ruling in favor of a waffling cult. A waffling cult cannot have Christians thrown in jail for refusing to play along. Especially with the 1st Amendment protecting Christians rightful fear of the warnings in their Holy Book in Jude 1. Jude 1 reminds Christians in the NEW Testament (the one of Jesus, not the Old jewish history citation) of Sodom and how it was destroyed. It warns Christians that if they promote or enable the spread of a homosexual culture into their own, even if they passively refuse to stop it, their soul will go to the pit of fire forever. The Court has I think four or five catholics. Sotomayor and Kennedy are both catholic. So they have heard that account and were aware of the problem before they voted. The Court knew they were creating a legal nightmare where two freight trains, 1. Their newly created favorite partial-"class" based on repugnant minority "behaviors-as-identity" and 2. The 1st Amendment requiring Christians to never enable homosexuality to spread as a culture, were destined to collide. And wouldn't you know it? Within less than one fiscal quarter after Obergefell, a Christian sat in jail for refusing to adopt the new cult values-as-"law"...
 

mdk

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2014
Messages
40,218
Reaction score
13,635
Points
2,630
Look it is Sil's 'Top Ten List of Abject Failures' from the previous 45 anti-gay threads. I am little disappointed you didn't mention Dylan Roof and wolves raising children.

Too funny.
 
OP
S

Silhouette

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
25,815
Reaction score
1,928
Points
265
OP
S

Silhouette

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
25,815
Reaction score
1,928
Points
265
Look it is Sil's 'Top Ten List of Abject Failures' from the previous 45 anti-gay threads. I am little disappointed you didn't mention Dylan Roof and wolves raising children.

Too funny.
I'm glad you did. Dylan Roof being the gay guy who shot up 9 Christians at bible study or the Oregon beta-boy shooter asking his victims who received his worst to identify as Christians or not are not part of this topic. But the wolves raising children thing is. As you know, the gay argument is "since gays are already raising children (as a rare unfortunate exception) they should be able to gain the benefits of marriage (tax breaks from states and the ability to adopt, even while "gay marriage' strips children of the reason states incentivized marriage in the first place.)

Sure, wolves can raise children. So can gays. But you don't make the unfortunate exceptions "The new Rule" at the expense of children in general over time...
 

Syriusly

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
54,851
Reaction score
7,126
Points
1,840
The problems with "gay marriage is constitutional" ...

There is now marriage equality in all 50 states.

Despite your homophobic rants.
Which doesn't change anything he said.

Evil being legal, doesn't mean it's not evil still.

Well the point is that there are mostly secular and not religious reasons why Obergefell is illegal, not just evil..

The point is that you are delusional and marriage equality is now the rule in all 50 states.
 

Syriusly

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
54,851
Reaction score
7,126
Points
1,840
[
Sure, wolves can raise children.

Wolves consider children to be tasty snacks.

Silhouette can see no difference between feeding children to wolves and a child being raised by two loving parents who happen to be gay.
 

mdk

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2014
Messages
40,218
Reaction score
13,635
Points
2,630
Look it is Sil's 'Top Ten List of Abject Failures' from the previous 45 anti-gay threads. I am little disappointed you didn't mention Dylan Roof and wolves raising children.

Too funny.
I'm glad you did. Dylan Roof being the gay guy who shot up 9 Christians at bible study or the Oregon beta-boy shooter asking his victims who received his worst to identify as Christians or not are not part of this topic. But the wolves raising children thing is. As you know, the gay argument is "since gays are already raising children (as a rare unfortunate exception) they should be able to gain the benefits of marriage (tax breaks from states and the ability to adopt, even while "gay marriage' strips children of the reason states incentivized marriage in the first place.)

Sure, wolves can raise children. So can gays. But you don't make the unfortunate exceptions "The new Rule" at the expense of children in general over time...

You don't disappoint. Please tell us more about about this 'pouty lipped' mass murder:
48254546.cached.jpg


:lol:
 
OP
S

Silhouette

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
25,815
Reaction score
1,928
Points
265
The point is that you are delusional and marriage equality is now the rule in all 50 states.

No, it isn't. Mississippi is challenging it...so is Georgia... Alabama Chief Justice Tries To Ban Same-Sex Marriage In His State
Georgia To Bolster Gay Marriage Refusals ..Religious Grounds..Though Secular Grounds Compelling Too Many other southern states as well will follow. Think of it as a "thank you" for your group using an event where a gay kid (with a black boyfriend) shot up 9 Christians at a Bible study (who just happened to be black) as a shoe horn to strip the rebel flag out of their culture as a matter of (1st Amendment violating) laws passed by your liberal implants in the South. Nevermind that the rebel flag stopped representing racism long ago and instead was a matter of pride for all the Southern people white and black in neo-times. You can't expect to clip the gonads of an entire region and then have them hand you your father/mother killing demands on a silver platter when you snap your fingers...
 

mdk

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2014
Messages
40,218
Reaction score
13,635
Points
2,630

Syriusly

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
54,851
Reaction score
7,126
Points
1,840
Look it is Sil's 'Top Ten List of Abject Failures' from the previous 45 anti-gay threads. I am little disappointed you didn't mention Dylan Roof and wolves raising children.

Too funny.
I'm glad you did. Dylan Roof being the gay guy who shot up 9 Christians at bible study ...

Just pointing out that this week the racist Dylan Roof was sentenced to death for murdering 9 African American Christians in church- because he wanted a race war.

Not- as Silhouette repeatedly claimed- because he was gay.

Silhouette is delusional.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$280.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top