Page 25 of 193 FirstFirst ... 1523242526273575125 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 1930

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

  1. #241
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon

    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,805
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDubya View Post
    Abandoning the rule of law in favor of judicial fiat is not a victory for rationality. No bigotry against homosexuals required to see how this is an awful, awful thing for the Supreme Court to do.
    No.

    This is you trying to rationalize that your position on this subject and abortion, the two things you are most vocal about is based on anything but pure, unadulterated hatred and anger.

    this isn't about some legal precedent... This is about hatred for you and you're doing a poor job of covering it up.
    #ZumaMustFall

  2. #242
    Guru
    Verthaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 12:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,044

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    They have devalued marriage
    My 14 year marriage to my wife hasn't been devalued at all. We still love each other deeply and we still get the tax breaks.

  3. #243
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    NH, USA
    Last Seen
    04-21-16 @ 02:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,544

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JumpinJack View Post
    Instead of a rightwing fluff piece, I would go by an actual scientific study that shows not only that children with same sex parents do as well. They do BETTER.

    But your logic is faulty. If studies show that children do better with same sex parents, does that mean that different-gender parents should not have children? Of course not.

    If studies show that children do better with parents that have brown eyes do better than parents with blue eyes, does that mean that parents with blue eyes should not have children? Of course not.

    But in this case, there is a dearth of studies on the subject, but a major recent one showed that children of same sex parents do better, across the board, than those of different-gender parents. Since you place a lot of stock in studies.
    Which studies? From leftwing Universities or other LW organizations? Please...

  4. #244
    Sage
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    7,876

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDubya View Post
    Do they not teach reading and comprehending plain English documents where you went to school?

    Rhetorical question.

    You are telling us a law is unconstitutional, but you have never actually studied the law. If you did, you would understand what the Constitution is, what is intended to be, how the law works and works in conjuction with the Constitution and how prior court decisions actually shape the law and future interpretations of the law. You seem rather unqualified to make such an absolute has you have. It seems you are running with impression and not knowledge and understanding.

    You do realize those the practice law hold the equivalent of a doctorate in the subject. Those appointed to the SOCTUS, not only hold a law degree, they usually hold a degree from one of the top schools in the US, and have years of experience distingushing themselves as judges and judges of Constitutional matters. It seems rather arrogant of you to simply state they are wrong.

    Do you boast equal knowledge of brain surgery?

  5. #245
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,216

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

    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  6. #246
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    46,057

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

    Quote Originally Posted by GunFora View Post
    Federal statute? Why do you think there has to be a federal statute that applies for someone to be sued?
    You said "churches will be in violation of federal law." So clearly you think such a law exists.

    Point it out.


    The Washington Post is a lib rag. As believable as the NY Times, Boston Globe, CNN and MSNBC.


    Look at the sources provided in the article.
    Measurement, methods, and divergent patterns: Reassessing the effects of same-sex parents
    Unless you're afraid of having your ideas challenged. I don't really care either way. The study is bunk, this has been widely shown from any number of sources.

  7. #247
    Wandering...
    Koros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Last Seen
    08-20-15 @ 05:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,953

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDubya View Post
    "Take the word of?"

    Right. Like we're not dealing with a plain English document here. It's not some holy text that only the priests can bestow upon you. Educate yourself.
    Oh, I am quite educated, thank you. If the Constitution were as painfully clear on issues as you seem to think, there'd be no need for a USSC. But, hey, if you want to think you know better than centuries of legal precedence and those who sit on the USSC...well, you're welcome to think so. What you think doesn't matter anyway, since it's all over and done with. Your side lost.
    “The Bible has noble poetry in it... and some good morals and a wealth of obscenity, and upwards of a thousand lies.” ― Mark Twain

  8. #248
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    09-27-16 @ 10:59 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,189

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    The fact that you can marry means I will not be asking my girlfriend to marry me...I don't want to share the same institution as you.

    You may have won a court case, and the left-leaning folks on this site may support you, but you will NEVER be socially accepted by mainstream America.

    I never had a problem with gays before today, but this is too much. I will not be your friend.
    Now you've gone and hurt their feelings. I hope you are proud of yourself.

  9. #249
    A sinister place...
    OrphanSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,818

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

    I read the opinion of the bare majority, and 1 of 4 of the dissents (I'll get to the other 3 here in a minute.) All of the arguments are extremely compelling on the issue of the 14th Amendment (Due Process and Equal Protection) vs. the rules of elected governance at the Federal Level vs. the State Level (with respect to Constitutional authorities.)

    The majority opinion seems to make the most Constitutional sense of equal protections, but the dissent from Justice Roberts seems to make the most sense from a standpoint of "restrained conception of the judicial role" (p.3 of his dissent, and something I argued yesterday with the ACA decision) and "what constitutes marriage, or—more precisely—who decides what constitutes marriage?" (p.4)

    It is a tough one, but I tend to side with the majority decision on this one. There is no Constitutional foundation for the idea of religious based discrimination. Once you define marriage in terms religion suggests, then the government applies any benefit to that you have discrimination against same sex couples looking for the same thing. The States made a major mistake allowing the appeals of religious institution to define marriage, and then see it applied on unequal terms.

    ------------

    "Excluding same-sex couples from marriage thus conflicts with a central premise of the right to marry." (p.15 of the majority decision)

    "Indeed, while the States are in general free to vary the benefits they confer on all married couples, they have throughout our history made marriage the basis for an expanding list of governmental rights, benefits, and responsibilities. These aspects of marital status include: taxation; inheritance and property rights; rules of intestate succession; spousal privilege in the law of evidence; hospital access; medical decision making authority; adoption rights; the rights and benefits of survivors; birth and death certificates; professional ethics rules; campaign finance restrictions; workers’ compensation benefits; health insurance; and child custody, support, and visitation rules."

    "There is no difference between same- and opposite-sex couples with respect to this principle." (both on p.16-17)

    "It follows that the Court also must hold—and it now does hold—that there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character"

    "They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right." (both on p.28.)
    "Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people." - Penn Jillette.

  10. #250
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    40,996

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    The fact that you can marry means I will not be asking my girlfriend to marry me...I don't want to share the same institution as you.

    You may have won a court case, and the left-leaning folks on this site may support you, but you will NEVER be socially accepted by mainstream America.

    I never had a problem with gays before today, but this is too much. I will not be your friend.




    Dude, seriously... that's embarrassing.


    Get a grip.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

Posting Permissions

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