Page 129 of 193 FirstFirst ... 2979119127128129130131139179 ... LastLast
Results 1,281 to 1,290 of 1930

Thread: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

  1. #1281
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,176

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    You would have to go back pre-Reagan....
    So none nominated by Clinton or Obama - that's convenient.

    It's your theory - surely you've got examples of these moderate, Democrat nominated Supreme Court Justices who've often taken the conservative argument in cases before the court.
    A Canadian conservative is one who believes in limited government and that the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms.

  2. #1282
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    26,188

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    Why do you care how many wives a man has?
    I don't, any more than I care how many husbands a woman has. I do care about the law though and our laws are set up for a two-person marriage. Before we start throwing in polygamous relationships, we need to address the clear political ramifications, come up with some decisions before we clog up the courts with child custody, inheritance and property rights and divorce proceedings that nobody has any clue how to handle.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  3. #1283
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    11-09-16 @ 12:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,227

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    so when do we get to see riots and secession like mike hukabee and all the repub candidates promised? Come on, back up your threats you cowards

  4. #1284
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,373

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    So none nominated by Clinton or Obama - that's convenient.

    It's your theory - surely you've got examples of these moderate, Democrat nominated Supreme Court Justices who've often taken the conservative argument in cases before the court.
    I would say that all of the Justices appointed by Clinton Obama, Bush1 and Bush 2 have all been litmus test judges. I think President's after Reagan learned how to use the litmus test without actually saying it.

  5. #1285
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,373

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Nah....its all rhetoric..just like....(ROTFLMFAO) "Repeal Obamacare".....LOL........

  6. #1286
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    11-05-16 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    19,799

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeTrumps View Post
    I'm pretty sure the Founding fathers didn't see the need to add the definition of marriage into the constitution. they could have never realized in a million years people would actually be ALTERING the definition of marriage and make it law. They didn't understand the First World problems we now get to deal with. I'm sure they are sorry they missed it.
    Uh, the civil union, the "marriage" recognized by the state, has been a matter of law for a long time. The whole question of extending partnership rights (recognizing the civil contract) to SS couples has been the point of the deliberations. Maybe you missed the memo.
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumpf
    "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    I am a medical provider. Try having the pressure of someones life in your hands.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  7. #1287
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    52,535

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I guess we will see.
    Unless I'm mistaken businesses don't commonly experience public backlash because of pay or benefit issues.

  8. #1288
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,176

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    I would say that all of the Justices appointed by Clinton Obama, Bush1 and Bush 2 have all been litmus test judges. I think President's after Reagan learned how to use the litmus test without actually saying it.
    Let's just look at the court as it exists and let's not try to kid the troops here.

    Those appointed by Clinton - Ginsberg and Breyer are both unflinching progressive liberals who've never found themselves on the opposite side of the other or their liberal progressive clones.

    Those appointed by Obama - Sotomayor and Kagan are both unflinching progressive liberals who've never found themselves on the opposite side of the other or their liberal progressive clones.

    Those appointed by GW Bush - Alito and Roberts - Alito has been an unflinching conservative who's never found himself on the side of a liberal majority ruling - Roberts, by all accounts, has been a disaster for conservatives and for the court in general. He wants to be the most popular girl at the party and has forgotten how to be a judge.

    Those appointed by GHW Bush - Thomas - an unflinching conservative who's never found himself on the side of a liberal majority ruling

    Those appointed by Reagan - Scalia and Kennedy - Scalia has been an unflinching conservative who's never found himself on the side of a liberal majority ruling and Kennedy has been a disappointment in his inconsistent behaviour and need/ego that drives him to want to be the deciding vote on many controversial issues and in the majority sides with the liberal view on such issues.

    As can be seen, Democrats have been a perfect 4 for 4 in choosing unflinching liberal ideologues. Republicans have been 3 for 5 in choosing unflinching conservative ideologues. Now a lot of that could and does have to do with the majority of those 5 Republican choices coming with majority Democrat Senate rule while all the Democrat ones came with majority Democrat Senate rule - that certainly helps in ensuring that the Democrat choices don't get "Borked".
    A Canadian conservative is one who believes in limited government and that the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms.

  9. #1289
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,373

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Let's just look at the court as it exists and let's not try to kid the troops here.

    Those appointed by Clinton - Ginsberg and Breyer are both unflinching progressive liberals who've never found themselves on the opposite side of the other or their liberal progressive clones.

    Those appointed by Obama - Sotomayor and Kagan are both unflinching progressive liberals who've never found themselves on the opposite side of the other or their liberal progressive clones.

    Those appointed by GW Bush - Alito and Roberts - Alito has been an unflinching conservative who's never found himself on the side of a liberal majority ruling - Roberts, by all accounts, has been a disaster for conservatives and for the court in general. He wants to be the most popular girl at the party and has forgotten how to be a judge.

    Those appointed by GHW Bush - Thomas - an unflinching conservative who's never found himself on the side of a liberal majority ruling

    Those appointed by Reagan - Scalia and Kennedy - Scalia has been an unflinching conservative who's never found himself on the side of a liberal majority ruling and Kennedy has been a disappointment in his inconsistent behaviour and need/ego that drives him to want to be the deciding vote on many controversial issues and in the majority sides with the liberal view on such issues.

    As can be seen, Democrats have been a perfect 4 for 4 in choosing unflinching liberal ideologues. Republicans have been 3 for 5 in choosing unflinching conservative ideologues. Now a lot of that could and does have to do with the majority of those 5 Republican choices coming with majority Democrat Senate rule while all the Democrat ones came with majority Democrat Senate rule - that certainly helps in ensuring that the Democrat choices don't get "Borked".

    Since the time of Reagan you can only come up with one - Roberts who you are being overly generous about because aside from a couple of decisions, he has pretty much sided with the other conservatives. Thank you for proving my point that both sides use the litmus test pretty well since the days of Reagan.

  10. #1290
    Professor
    JoeTrumps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Memphis
    Last Seen
    11-07-16 @ 03:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,297

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    raise your hand if you think this is the end of listening to/reading/watching gay groups complaining?

    suckers. this is only the beginning. we will go to our graves being told what horrible people we are because the gay's are being denied (FILL IN THE BLANK). That is when we are not be taken to school for what we have done to the black community. fun way to spend our short time on earth. cheers!

Posting Permissions

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