- Joined
- Mar 3, 2010
- Messages
- 60,458
- Reaction score
- 12,357
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Equal Protection Clause.
Live it. Learn it. Love it.
Only applies to states.
Equal Protection Clause.
Live it. Learn it. Love it.
Equal Protection Clause.
Live it. Learn it. Love it.
why? because then people are rejected, and hurt, the reaction to the get even, since this is not possible by physical force, a crime, they seek government to be there force, and get even.
as has been stated by some of the gay community, 'let it be a warning to people who feel they can discriminate"
so wrong you are, the 5th amendment applies to government only, not the people.
Why would ANYONE want someone who obviously hates them to be in charge of wedding pictures in the first place....I mean come one, she would probably do a lousy job on purpose or lose the pictures because her pure little Christian heart compels her to do so.
lol. You don't even know what number amendment the equal protection clause falls under.
Pssst: 14th.
actully i cut you slack, and you didnt even see it.
The 14th pass by congress after the civl war incorporated the bill of rights , and made it apply to states, as where the bill of rights did not apply to states before the civl war.
The 5th was equal protection, becuase it restircts the government from creating any law which denies government from violating life, liberty, property without due process
by using the 14th you hurt yourself
it clearly states...." no state shall".....does not say no citizen or business shall, .....and it also states privledges and immunities, , ...it does not say rights.
In 1873 the ussc declared the 14th only applied to slaves, it has only been the in 20th century that descion was changed.
So using the 14th is not a smart move.
(Reuters) - A U.S. judge ordered Kentucky on Thursday to recognize the legal same-sex marriages of residents who wed elsewhere, the latest in a string of court victories for gay rights advocates.
U.S. District Judge John G. Heyburn II said the Kentucky laws that deny the marriages of same-sex couples "violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and they are void and unenforceable."
U.S. judge orders Kentucky to recognize same-sex marriages
Happening all over the place now, buddy. Get used to it.
Oh! So everyone's rights aren't equal, after all?
marriage is a privilege because it is licensed by the state.....a government........ rights are not licensed.
since government dispenses that privilege, then It must treat all people equal and provide the privilege, ..unless they can show it is in the interest of the states not to give the privilege which Is difficult to do.
I think you should read the 14th before you cite it.
SCOTUS has ruled Marriage is a Fundamental Right.
Er, DOMA has been struck down by SCOTUS. Did you miss that?then if that was so, ...question?.. then how have state government passed. constitutional amendments, preventing it, states laws which prevent it, the government creating DOMA.
since it is a recognized right, this would have meant such laws would have never been on the books.
I am glad of one thing, ...you clearly stated, that the COURT, would be the one to rule if something is a right, congress or a state government, cannot create any right for the people by legislation.
Er, DOMA has been struck down by SCOTUS. Did you miss that?
Have you missed Federal judges all over the country striking down those laws that ban same-sex marriage as Unconstitutional?
And, the most recent ruling from Virginia, drew upon Loving v Virginia.
"Crowds gathered as oral arguments got underway Tuesday morning in the case of Bostic v. Rainey. The case challenges Virginia’s amendment that bans same-sex marriage.
In 2006, 57 percent of Virginians voted in favor of the Virginia Marriage Amendment that defined marriage as only between a man and a woman.
Inside the courthouse
Ted Olson and David Boies presented the plaintiffs’ side.
Olson said Virginia, “erects a wall around gay and lesbian citizens.” He added that marriage is a fundamental right of an individual, and not of the state, citing previous Supreme Court rulings. Boise asked what motivates the supporters of the ban other than maintaining the status quo.
Newly-elected Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring announced last month, he would reverse Virginia’s stance on the issue and would not defend the amendment in court.
Virginia’s Solicitor General Stuart Raphael argued Attorney General Herring’s position in court on behalf of the Commonwealth.
Raphael said the case is legally indistinguishable from Loving v. Virginia, which overturned a ban on interracial marriage in 1967. He said the idea that there is “no traditional right to same sex marriage” is a major flaw.
Ruling could ‘change the basic concept of marriage’ in Virginia | WTVR.com
Well then I suppose thank god for the internet. There's a way out of it with brick and mortor too - limited membership buyers clubs.
If the government wants to run my business from soup to nuts, what's the point? Let them do the work.
I asked you what right. you wish to cite federal laws, ..well federal laws cannot create rights for the people, only rights recognized in the constitution or rights recognized by the USSC are rights.
the court has never stated you have a right to not be discriminated against, by a citizen or business.
constitutional law states that governments cannot discriminate against the people....because constitutions only apply to government they never limit people.
so again what right per constitutional law, was violated by the business owner.
p.s. since the couple was on the business owners property at the time, the couple has no exercisable rights to speak of
so are you claiming this is a big conspiracy theory? all those laws and rights and court cases and the usages of the 14 and civil rights all these years is all wrong . . only your opinion is right?
and be clear, i have ZERO interest in discussion your opinions and philosophies im asking you fro FACTS that prove all that stuff wrong
what FACTS do have that prove the facts above and the law and established rights and court cases wrong?
What rights did you list above? I don't see anything.
1.) nope thats just your OPINION and nothing else, in FACT many human rights groups support the 14th and civil rights :lamo
2.) yep seems i have to keep educating you and proving your posts wrong lol
people and private orgs are not allowed to break the law and illegally discriminate
if you disagree by all means PLEASE factually prove otherwise, i cant wait to read this humor
facts win . . . AGAIN lol
I have heard that there are plenty of LGBT groups that would love to be a part of drafting new versions of these bills so that religious liberties can be protected and incidents like the Cake Shop Owner and Wedding Photographer will not happen in other states. Instead of being adversarial, why not include gay rights folks so that we can have legislation that genuinely seeks to secure religious liberty rather than just trying to strip gay rights under the guise of religion? Freedom of association should be a public discussion, not a partisan issue.