What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

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!

The use of the 14th Amendment by gays for gay marriage can't be used

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
It is about equal protection under the law, which means that in one same gender couple is denied a marriage license all same gender couples must be denied a marriage license, that would be equal. States laws say that two people of the gender cannot marry, they don't specifically state that homosexuals can't marry, so technically a gay man can marry a lesbian, this refutes the lie that homosexuals are denied the right to marry, they can marry, they just cannot marry a person of the same gender.

State laws forbid fathers from marrying daughters, mothers from marrying son, siblings from marrying siblings, bigamy and polygamy, how are gays any better than those people? If they argument that the 14th amendment doesn't apply to the above people how can they argue it applies to their argument?
 
Last edited:

Ravi

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
90,899
Reaction score
14,000
Points
2,205
Location
Hating Hatters
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.
 
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.

Thats not the argument Ravi, gays don't believe bigamists, polygamists, and people incestuous relationships should be married but feel they should somehow have special consideration. The 14th Amendment doesn't apply to them. Since a lesbian and a gay man can marry each other gays are not denied the right to marriage. Just like two siblings cannot marry, two people of the same gender cannot marry.
 
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
The 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause does not guarantee individual liberties Ravi, thats what you're arguing and using the 14th Amendment as a strawman to advance something it doesn't in fact guarantee.
 

NoNukes

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
15,240
Reaction score
2,489
Points
255
Location
At the computer
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.

Thats not the argument Ravi, gays don't believe bigamists, polygamists, and people incestuous relationships should be married but feel they should somehow have special consideration. The 14th Amendment doesn't apply to them. Since a lesbian and a gay man can marry each other gays are not denied the right to marriage. Just like two siblings cannot marry, two people of the same gender cannot marry.

That is HER argument, and mine. Your argument is actually pretty stupid and holds no water.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
150,938
Reaction score
23,076
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
It is about equal protection under the law, which means that in one same gender couple is denied a marriage license all same gender couples must be denied a marriage license, that would be equal. States laws say that two people of the gender cannot marry, they don't specifically state that homosexuals can't marry, so technically a gay man can marry a lesbian, this refutes the lie that homosexuals are denied the right to marry, they can marry, they just cannot marry a person of the same gender.

State laws forbid fathers from marrying daughters, mothers from marrying son, siblings from marrying siblings, bigamy and polygamy, how are gays any better than those people? If they argument that the 14th amendment doesn't apply to the above people how can they argue it applies to their argument?

Logically, what you say is true, but liberal jurist have always treated the 14th Amendment like a kid's breakfast cereals. "14th Amendment-Os- Free Prize Inside".

"Wow, look, I found a right to abortion on demand!"

"I found a right to strike down all the Sodomy laws!"

So really, we've already got Judge Walker in California making the argument that based on Lawrence and Romer, that there is a right to gay marriage in the constitution.

The Ninth Circus is likely to uphold his decision. That just leaves the SCOTUS. Four justices - the clinton and Obama appointees, will agree with that position, Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Thomas against. That just leaves Justice Kennedy, who has leaned towards gay rights.

My guess is, that when the Republicans win in 2012, Kennedy will vote in favor of it as a final act of screw you.
 
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.

Thats not the argument Ravi, gays don't believe bigamists, polygamists, and people incestuous relationships should be married but feel they should somehow have special consideration. The 14th Amendment doesn't apply to them. Since a lesbian and a gay man can marry each other gays are not denied the right to marriage. Just like two siblings cannot marry, two people of the same gender cannot marry.

That is HER argument, and mine. Your argument is actually pretty stupid and holds no water.

Search the 14th Amendment and find where is says that it guarantee individual liberties.
 
Last edited:
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
I fail to see where incests, polygamy and same gender marriage are liberties in the Constitution.
 

NoNukes

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
15,240
Reaction score
2,489
Points
255
Location
At the computer
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.

And if you can get 51% of the population to agree with you on that, that's the way it should be.

There should be no need for this, it is a basic human right, something that is lost on many right wingers.
 

OohPooPahDoo

Gold Member
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
15,347
Reaction score
985
Points
175
Location
N'Awlins Mid-City
It is about equal protection under the law, which means that in one same gender couple is denied a marriage license all same gender couples must be denied a marriage license, that would be equal. States laws say that two people of the gender cannot marry, they don't specifically state that homosexuals can't marry, so technically a gay man can marry a lesbian, this refutes the lie that homosexuals are denied the right to marry, they can marry, they just cannot marry a person of the same gender.

State laws forbid fathers from marrying daughters, mothers from marrying son, siblings from marrying siblings, bigamy and polygamy, how are gays any better than those people? If they argument that the 14th amendment doesn't apply to the above people how can they argue it applies to their argument?

That's the dumbest legal argument I've ever heard. where did you get your JD from?
 

NoNukes

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
15,240
Reaction score
2,489
Points
255
Location
At the computer
Human rights do not need to be in the Constitution
 

OohPooPahDoo

Gold Member
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
15,347
Reaction score
985
Points
175
Location
N'Awlins Mid-City
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.

Thats not the argument Ravi, gays don't believe bigamists, polygamists, and people incestuous relationships should be married but feel they should somehow have special consideration.

It isn't "special consideration" to be allowed the same rights as everyone else. Jesus you are stupid.

The 14th Amendment doesn't apply to them.
Please show me where the 14th amendment says gays don't have equal protection. Thanks. Then go suck a cock you closet homo.
 
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.

And if you can get 51% of the population to agree with you on that, that's the way it should be.

There should be no need for this, it is a basic human right, something that is lost on many right wingers.

Marriage is not a right for all people, kids can't marry kids, siblings can't marry siblings, the Constitution never states that marriage is a right. Read the equal protection clause under the 14th Amendment, unless it says specifically that incest and homosexuality are protected under the 14th Amendment gays can't use it.
 
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.

Thats not the argument Ravi, gays don't believe bigamists, polygamists, and people incestuous relationships should be married but feel they should somehow have special consideration.

It isn't "special consideration" to be allowed the same rights as everyone else. Jesus you are stupid.

It is special consideration since gays argue that polygamists can't marry and that they shouldn't be compared to polygamists making the same argument. What makes a gay more deserving of marriage than a polygamist?

Please show me where the 14th amendment says gays don't have equal protection. Thanks. Then go suck a cock you closet homo.

Find it in the 14th Amendment where gays are even mentioned any place. A gay man can marry a lesbian because they're different genders, but technically they're still both homosexuals and can marry so how is equal protection not accorded?


Typical liberal insult, why don't you go and suck one you homo?
 
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
Human rights do not need to be in the Constitution

Incestous couples, polygamist and gay marrying are human rights? Under which law or Constitution, the liberal homosexual-machine propaganda? Search the Constitution and find it.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
150,938
Reaction score
23,076
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Any two consenting adults should be allowed to marry for what ever reason they please.

And if you can get 51% of the population to agree with you on that, that's the way it should be.

There should be no need for this, it is a basic human right, something that is lost on many right wingers.

This is one of those things both Right and Left don't get.

As George Carlin once opined, there are no "rights". Any fool who thinks he has rights should look up "Japanese-Americans, 1942" on Wiki.

We don't have "rights". We have privilages the majority of our fellow citizens accept that we have, even begrudgingly. Get us scared enough or angry enough, and rights vanish pretty quickly for the people we are scared of.

When you get 51% to agree that gays should have the privilage to call their relationship a "marriage", then and only then should it happen. If you sneak it in through the courts, people will never accept it entirely. Look at Roe v. Wade as an example. People are still mad about that, even though legislatively, things were going in that direction, anyway.

Personally, I think that gays should be allowed to get married. But win that fight at the ballot box, not the court house.
 
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
earth to the trolls, this thread is about whether th equal protection clause under the 14th Amendment applies, this has nothing to do with my belief as to whether gays should be married, the dumbfack that told me to suck off a cock it too emtional and retarded to see this.
 
OP
Flaylo

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,899
Reaction score
744
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
And if you can get 51% of the population to agree with you on that, that's the way it should be.

There should be no need for this, it is a basic human right, something that is lost on many right wingers.

This is one of those things both Right and Left don't get.

As George Carlin once opined, there are no "rights". Any fool who thinks he has rights should look up "Japanese-Americans, 1942" on Wiki.

We don't have "rights". We have privilages the majority of our fellow citizens accept that we have, even begrudgingly. Get us scared enough or angry enough, and rights vanish pretty quickly for the people we are scared of.

When you get 51% to agree that gays should have the privilage to call their relationship a "marriage", then and only then should it happen. If you sneak it in through the courts, people will never accept it entirely. Look at Roe v. Wade as an example. People are still mad about that, even though legislatively, things were going in that direction, anyway.

Personally, I think that gays should be allowed to get married. But win that fight at the ballot box, not the court house.

The problem with NoNukes is that he thinks everything that everyone does in America is a "right", gay sex and incest sex are not rights, if he thinks they are rights the burden of proof is on him to prove it, not for the government to prove they are not rights.
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
257,861
Reaction score
77,460
Points
2,260
It is about equal protection under the law, which means that in one same gender couple is denied a marriage license all same gender couples must be denied a marriage license, that would be equal. States laws say that two people of the gender cannot marry, they don't specifically state that homosexuals can't marry, so technically a gay man can marry a lesbian, this refutes the lie that homosexuals are denied the right to marry, they can marry, they just cannot marry a person of the same gender.

State laws forbid fathers from marrying daughters, mothers from marrying son, siblings from marrying siblings, bigamy and polygamy, how are gays any better than those people? If they argument that the 14th amendment doesn't apply to the above people how can they argue it applies to their argument?

Dumbest thread of the week

Not worth refuting
 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top