SCOTUS Changed The Constitution To Include (Just) Some Behaviors (Their Favorites, Not Ours)

[Silhouette]

The Supreme Court of course did no such thing. Just your fantasies again.

Uh . . . SaintSil . . . the showdown in Court was decided last week.
This is over.

Perhaps you failed to read this on the last page in your zeal to spam it into oblivion?


No, no it isn't actually...

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) -- A few court clerks in Kentucky were refusing to issue marriage licenses to any couple Monday as an objection to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage....Casey County Clerk Casey Davis said his Christian beliefs would not allow him to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples..."My religious convictions will not allow me to in good conscience issue same-sex marriage licenses," Davis said....Clerks in Rowan and Lawrence counties also have halted issuing all marriage licenses in response to the Supreme Court ruling, The Lexington Herald-Leader first reported Monday. Repeated calls to those offices were not answered...
The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky said its lawyers would be willing to represent same-sex couples who are refused a marriage license in Kentucky...."It's our contention that government officials' personal objections are insufficient to justify refusing to do what they have been elected by the people to do, Same-sex marriage Kentucky court clerks refuse to issue licenses - San Jose Mercury News

And so, the infamous pending case of "the cult of LGBT v Christians" begins its march right back up to SCOTUS. The premise of LGBTs being behaviors that they themselves don't really understand is going to be finally discussed. They are not a race. This isn't even in the same ballpark as race since for the first time in human history, we are being asked to accept motherless or fatherless "marriages" as "acceptable bests for raising kids. While in practice they are inferior: Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

They are behaviors (just the Court's favorites remember) getting a "special favorites pass" from SCOTUS to circumvent regulation, while polygamy and incest don't get that pass. This is actually inequality, fascism and new legislation from the judicial branch, which is FORBIDDEN.

So it's far, far from over. This has just begun. But you knew it would be this way. You knew from Hobby Lobby that it would be this way. And the Court did too. Which is why it is still unfathomable to me that they did what they did last Friday. They are in such a conflict of interest quagmire that I actually feel sorry for them at this point.

The 9th Amendment says that no provision of the Constitution or its interpretation may squelch the rights of another. And that other in question now as you know full well and always knew would be is the 1st Amendment practice of one's faith in day to day life. When the practice of one's faith in daily life hurts someone, as in sharia law, it cannot be. But to passively resist joining in behaviors hurts not one person and the punishment promised for failure to do so as warned in Jude 1 of the New Testament of Jesus Christ is soul-death.
An alternate title for this case could be "The 9th Amendment Case"..

 

[AmericanFirst1]

Uh . . . SaintSil . . . the showdown in Court was decided last week.

This is over.

No, no it isn't actually...

Yep- marriage is legal in all 50 states now- regardless of the gender of the person you want to marry.

Not in my Church.

 

[Syriusly]

The 10th

The 3d.

 

[Syriusly]

The Supreme Court of course did no such thing. Just your fantasies again.

Uh . . . SaintSil . . . the showdown in Court was decided last week.
This is over.

Perhaps you failed to read this on the last page in your zeal to spam it into oblivion?
"..

Who actually reads all of your wall of text?

Marriage is legal now in all 50 states- regardless of the gender you want to marry.

The only thing now is resolving how they will be legally married.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The few county court hold outs are being made to comply.

Yeah, Sil, not matter how much you bleat, this is over.

 

[Silhouette]

The few county court hold outs are being made to comply.

Yeah, Sil, not matter how much you bleat, this is over.

Precisely who is suppressing Christian's right to civil process? Can you cite quotes and links?

 

[JakeStarkey]

No Christian has a right to suppress civil process.

Where did you get such a silly idea?

 

[Silhouette]

No Christian has a right to suppress civil process.

Where did you get such a silly idea?

They do if it violates their faith's core edict that prescribes soul-death for enabling the spread of a homosexual culture (Jude 1, Christian New Testament of Jesus Christ).

Where did I get such a "silly" idea? From the 9th Amendment of the US Constitution that says no one part of it may suppress the rights granted in another; in this case the 1st Amendment.

Here's another "silly" idea: justices are not allowed to create a new and exclusionary class of "just their favorite behaviors" as gaining new protections from majority regulation. That's called an amendment to the Constitution. Only Congress is allowed to do that..

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sil, you were wrong across the Board on the issue, and you are equally invalid as a Christian philosopher. Run along.

Oh, here's a hint: does the Constitution or the Bible govern the USA?

 

[Silhouette]

1st Amendment Jake

 

[JakeStarkey]

The 9th is not at issue anymore than any of your other pet nonsense were at issue. You are simply not valid on Bible or law.

 

[Silhouette]

The 9th Amendment says that no provision or interpretation of the Constitution may squelch rights guaranteed in another part.

Read it and weep Jake because it's going to be your legal nemesis when the real gay marriage case makes its way to SCOTUS.

Sil, you were wrong across the Board on the issue, and you are equally invalid as a Christian philosopher. Run along.
Oh, here's a hint: does the Constitution or the Bible govern the USA?

The 1st Amendment is part of the Constitution. Will you have your pocket-Justices next redact the 9th Amendment without the permission of Congress to make secular law capable of expunging people's right to exercise heeding Jude 1's warnings?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Exactly. We are all created equal. We are going to celebrate that on the 4th. You are not free to deny others the rights you have: simple as that.

Why would you? Really. Why?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I am curious- how many threads do you think Silhouette will start in her continuing melt down over the Court saying people can get married?

1 a day? 2 a day?

It is rather amusing to watch, in a sick sort of way.

I have never met a chick with a dick.

I guess your experiences are different than mine.

I think you've met more than most.

As I said- I have never met any- you are the one who posted about 'dicks are for chicks'.

Tell us all about your experiences with chicks with dicks.

I think you have a reading comprehension problem, a lack of even a tittle of humor, and a putrid imagination.

And I'm sure those are your good qualities.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I am curious- how many threads do you think Silhouette will start in her continuing melt down over the Court saying people can get married?

1 a day? 2 a day?

It is rather amusing to watch, in a sick sort of way.

I have never met a chick with a dick.

I guess your experiences are different than mine.

I think you've met more than most.

As I said- I have never met any- you are the one who posted about 'dicks are for chicks'. Tell us all about your experiences with chicks with dicks.

I think you have a reading comprehension problem, a lack of even a tittle of humor, and a putrid imagination. And I'm sure those are your good qualities.

Says the humorless poster with the putrid imagination. saintmike apparently has had personal some interaction with folks that would best be kept quiet.

 

[Silhouette]

There's that 80% number in the polls again. Weird! Keeps happening. I wonder why?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

SCOTUS Changed The Constitution To Include (Just) Some Behaviors (Their Favorites, Not Ours)

Another ridiculous lie from the right.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your poll in USMB is for grins and chuckles, Sil.

 

[Syriusly]

I am curious- how many threads do you think Silhouette will start in her continuing melt down over the Court saying people can get married?

1 a day? 2 a day?

It is rather amusing to watch, in a sick sort of way.

I have never met a chick with a dick.

I guess your experiences are different than mine.

I think you've met more than most.

As I said- I have never met any- you are the one who posted about 'dicks are for chicks'.

Tell us all about your experiences with chicks with dicks.

I think you have a reading comprehension problem, a lack of even a tittle of humor, and a putrid imagination.

And I'm sure those are your good qualities.

Is there some reason why you post a big sign about dicks are for chicks and then refuse to comment on your experiences with chicks with dicks?

 

[Syriusly]

There's that 80% number in the polls again. Weird! Keeps happening. I wonder why?

Because thats what the voices in your head tell you.