Second American Civil War...

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
It was an issue left up to the states until the gay activists tried using court rulings in Massachussets and direct violations of laws in California to force Gay marriage to be legal in every state. If you think that isnt what they are doing then you have to be totally ignorant.

Then, boyo, it's a matter for the state's to decide now, isn't it.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by insein
You sure say that dubbyah is evil and subverts the constitution alot, bully. when are you going to tell us where and when he has actually done this?

Give the USA PATRIOT Act a good, close reading. It was passed largely unread, and now many of those who voted for it, and have now had time to study it are having serious second thoughts.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Pale Rider
Not only that, bully is part of a loathing lunatic fringe that borders on treason.

Well scare me!

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Maybe it's generalization, something EVERYBODY here is guilty of at 1 time or another. Many people I have seen that display "loathing" of GWB are on a rampage that borders on sedition.

Whether or not you want to realize it, the USA is at war.

America is not engaged in any declared war. While the military action in Afghanistan was justified, as it was willlingly in service to those who planned, financed and carried out the 9/11 attacks, it was not, and is not a declared war.

Iraq does not even meet the minimum standards of a just war as laid out by the United States Bishops Conference in 1983. It was a war of aggression against an nation that posed no imminent threat to the US, or any other nation. The supposed weapons of mass destruction have never been produced, and what few chemical weapons that have been found were not theater weapons, they were tactical weapons. If any are guilty of treason or sedition, it is the Bush administration in its mindless pursuit of the war in Iraq while the monsters that perpetrated the attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Administration has also been derelict in its pursuit of the war in Iraq by failing to have any meaningful plan for rebuilding the nation after the war.

I could go on, but what's the point..y'all are too ******* blind, willfully or not, to see what's really going on anyways. And if you do see what Dubbyuh and his gang of thugs is doing, and still support them, then you are as depraved and degenerate as they are.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Give the USA PATRIOT Act a good, close reading. It was passed largely unread, and now many of those who voted for it, and have now had time to study it are having serious second thoughts.

I have read the Patriot Act. now can you tell me any case in the US where someones rights have been withheld due to the Patriot Act that wasnt a terrorist?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by insein
I have read the Patriot Act. now can you tell me any case in the US where someones rights have been withheld due to the Patriot Act that wasnt a terrorist?

A certain US lawyer who was wrongly implicated in the Madrid bombings.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Then, boyo, it's a matter for the state's to decide now, isn't it.

HELLO!?! Are you not reading what im saying or just dense. The states arent going to have a say in this because once the activists have it legal in one state, they are going to use the courts to make it legal in all states thereby robbing the states of their rights. Did you read anything i just said?!?!

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
A certain US lawyer who was wrongly implicated in the Madrid bombings.

AND that was for how long? We don't YET know how much $ he will get for his difficulties. I heard it said that his business could be adversly affected, I doubt it-he's become the darling of the left.

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
America is not engaged in any declared war.

The US may not have declared war, but the opposition has........

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
HELLO!?! Are you not reading what im saying or just dense. The states arent going to have a say in this because once the activists have it legal in one state, they are going to use the courts to make it legal in all states thereby robbing the states of their rights. Did you read anything i just said?!?!

Thus it is a matter for the states... If the states want to pass amendments to their constitutions banning same-gender marriages, than it behooves them to do so. It is not a matter for the federal gubmint...Dubbyuh has spoken.

 

[007]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
I could go on, but what's the point..y'all are too ******* blind, willfully or not, to see what's really going on anyways. And if you do see what Dubbyuh and his gang of thugs is doing, and still support them, then you are as depraved and degenerate as they are.

Ummmm, would that be The United States of America you are refering to?

If you HATE America and it's ruling power that much, might I suggest you move somewhere you'd like better. Say Cuba, North Korea, or perhaps your beloved France.

Where ever, it doesn't matter. Just do us all a favor and move the hell outta here! ******* traitor.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Thus it is a matter for the states... If the states want to pass amendments to their constitutions banning same-gender marriages, than it behooves them to do so. It is not a matter for the federal gubmint...Dubbyuh has spoken.

Normally I am a huge supporter of state's rights. However, in this case, state's rights is moot, for two reasons:

1. The Supreme Court, in a decision largely applauded by the Left, struck down Texas's sodomy law, finding that such a law was an undue invasion of privacy. By extension, banning gay marriages by state law would also fall under that undue invasion of privacy banner.
2. The Constitution requires that all states recognize licenses issued by other states. Therefore, if a gay couple is wed is Massachusets, Texas or Washington is required, by the Constitution, to recognize that marriage, even if gay marriage is outlawed in those states. Therefore, only a federal solution will suffice - and specifically one that will be above the reach of federal-level judges: a Constitutional Amendment.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Normally I am a huge supporter of state's rights. However, in this case, state's rights is moot, for two reasons:

1. The Supreme Court, in a decision largely applauded by the Left, struck down Texas's sodomy law, finding that such a law was an undue invasion of privacy. By extension, banning gay marriages by state law would also fall under that undue invasion of privacy banner.
2. The Constitution requires that all states recognize licenses issued by other states. Therefore, if a gay couple is wed is Massachusets, Texas or Washington is required, by the Constitution, to recognize that marriage, even if gay marriage is outlawed in those states. Therefore, only a federal solution will suffice - and specifically one that will be above the reach of federal-level judges: a Constitutional Amendment.

can a constitutional amendment be ruled unconstitutional?

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
can a constitutional amendment be ruled unconstitutional?

Only by NewGuy.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Only by NewGuy.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Thus it is a matter for the states... If the states want to pass amendments to their constitutions banning same-gender marriages, than it behooves them to do so. It is not a matter for the federal gubmint...Dubbyuh has spoken.

Obviously you are missing what im saying. Since you dont bother to actually read what i write, i see no point in continuing.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Normally I am a huge supporter of state's rights. However, in this case, state's rights is moot, for two reasons:

1. The Supreme Court, in a decision largely applauded by the Left, struck down Texas's sodomy law, finding that such a law was an undue invasion of privacy. By extension, banning gay marriages by state law would also fall under that undue invasion of privacy banner.
2. The Constitution requires that all states recognize licenses issued by other states. Therefore, if a gay couple is wed is Massachusets, Texas or Washington is required, by the Constitution, to recognize that marriage, even if gay marriage is outlawed in those states. Therefore, only a federal solution will suffice - and specifically one that will be above the reach of federal-level judges: a Constitutional Amendment.

Exactly what ive been saying! But Bully is to frickin dense that he cant understand it. He will probably come back continue saying the same stuff he has been.