Page 100 of 112 FirstFirst ... 50909899100101102110 ... LastLast
Results 991 to 1,000 of 1111

Thread: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

  1. #991
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I have no doubt the homosexuals will eventually win, for better or worse.
    The point is that they will win due to to being correct.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  2. #992
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    The point is that they will win due to to being correct.
    I'm sure you believe you are right.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  3. #993
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I'm sure you believe you are right.
    What I think is not the point, the point is whether the argument is correct.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  4. #994
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. As it stands that is not the opinion in my state and quite a few other states. The laws of this state aren't governed by your opinion, China's opinion nor California's opinion. Not should they. When marriage changes into something else IN THIS STATE, then it will be legislated as something else IN THIS STATE. AGAIN, as it should be.
    The laws of any state are governed by the US Constitution though. And when laws violate the Constitutional guarantees, they are overturned. Plus, the laws of whatever your state is are not as you claim. No matter what state you live in, marriage is not about procreation according to your laws. You cannot prove otherwise using solely your marriage laws.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  5. #995
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    The laws of any state are governed by the US Constitution though. And when laws violate the Constitutional guarantees, they are overturned. Plus, the laws of whatever your state is are not as you claim. No matter what state you live in, marriage is not about procreation according to your laws. You cannot prove otherwise using solely your marriage laws.
    If they violate constitutional rights, they get overturned. The Justices went out of their way to make sure they didn't issue a ruling that state laws violated the constitution, so your point is moot.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  6. #996
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    What I think is not the point, the point is whether the argument is correct.
    Well, you say it is and I'm sure you believe you are right.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  7. #997
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    From Reuters.
    This simply isn't true. Several of the Justices wanted to tackle the issue of same sex marriage on a state level. The split in the Prop 8 decision was not on partisan lines at all.

    If given the chance, there is a very strong possibility that the SCOTUS would rule to overturn state laws pertaining to same sex marriage, as long as there is not a technicality allowing some or most Justices to avoid this decision. This is why there are certain cases going up from certain states that would have to be ruled on by the SCOTUS and not dropped back to a lower court decision. The only issue is waiting for one of those to make it up to the Court.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  8. #998
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Well, you say it is and I'm sure you believe you are right.
    Both sides "believe", the point still is that you have accepted your side will lose the argument.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  9. #999
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    If they violate constitutional rights, they get overturned. The Justices went out of their way to make sure they didn't issue a ruling that state laws violated the constitution, so your point is moot.
    The decision on Prop 8 was made for a completely different reason than you believe. Only 5 Justices went out of their way to push it back to the state decision, and it was simply to put it off. Once given no other choice (which certain cases from certain states would set up), they would have no choice but to rule on the constitutionality, and it would apply to all states. It is highly unlikely the next time this comes up to the SCOTUS (and it is likely to come up within the next decade or sooner), that they will punt it. They know that this will have to be addressed soon. They simply bought themselves a little more time.

    I think Kennedy's opinion went out of its way to avoid saying that the states had an absolute right to define marriage as they want. Instead, he emphasized the fact that the federal government had no right to deny positive recognition of rights/protections the state deemed appropriate. He didn't say anything about the state rights being more important than individual rights.

    This particular punting (although many of us for ssm do not think it was right) wasn't unexpected and gives the states a little more time to get turn those states that are going to change on their own anytime soon. A ruling that strikes down laws in about 5 or so years will apply mainly to states that would take much more time to give equality to if left to their own ways. And it will take about 5 or so years (or at least it normally does) to get another good case (such as Windsor was for DOMA, or Loving was for interracial marriage) up to the Court.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  10. #1000
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    The decision on Prop 8 was made for a completely different reason than you believe. Only 5 Justices went out of their way to push it back to the state decision, and it was simply to put it off. Once given no other choice (which certain cases from certain states would set up), they would have no choice but to rule on the constitutionality, and it would apply to all states. It is highly unlikely the next time this comes up to the SCOTUS (and it is likely to come up within the next decade or sooner), that they will punt it. They know that this will have to be addressed soon. They simply bought themselves a little more time.

    I think Kennedy's opinion went out of its way to avoid saying that the states had an absolute right to define marriage as they want. Instead, he emphasized the fact that the federal government had no right to deny positive recognition of rights/protections the state deemed appropriate. He didn't say anything about the state rights being more important than individual rights.

    This particular punting (although many of us for ssm do not think it was right) wasn't unexpected and gives the states a little more time to get turn those states that are going to change on their own anytime soon. A ruling that strikes down laws in about 5 or so years will apply mainly to states that would take much more time to give equality to if left to their own ways. And it will take about 5 or so years (or at least it normally does) to get another good case (such as Windsor was for DOMA, or Loving was for interracial marriage) up to the Court.
    Well, good luck with that, then.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •