Page 66 of 193 FirstFirst ... 1656646566676876116166 ... LastLast
Results 651 to 660 of 1930

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

  1. #651
    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]

    Quote Originally Posted by BrewerBob View Post
    Where in the WORLD did you come up with that?

    the idea of gay marriage wasn't conceived or thought of till the 90's. if you can show me one gay group in the 80's who demanded to get married I would love to see it. but since no evidence exists maybe you can see my point(who am I kidding. of course you don't)

  2. #652
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,183

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

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    You mentioned something about churches being required to be married, that simply is not true, churches can refuse to marry for any reason.
    I never made such a statement. I said, it should be hoped that after this victory the left does not become vindictive and attempt to have courts force churches and/or the religious to perform marriages that are against their religious teachings.
    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.

  3. #653
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 02:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    I, for one, have indicated my religious and legal opinion on the subject. The religious aspect trumps man's law though.
    Not in my country, USA, it doesn't. Are you willing to say that for Muslims as well?


  4. #654
    Randian PUA
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    58,623

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeTrumps View Post
    the idea of gay marriage wasn't conceived or thought of till the 90's. if you can show me one gay group in the 80's who demanded to get married I would love to see it. but since no evidence exists maybe you can see my point(who am I kidding. of course you don't)
    Does the 70's count?

    Gay marriage and Baker v. Nelson : SCOTUSblog
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  5. #655
    u mad, snowflake?
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    TITANPOINTE, NYC
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 12:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    68,609

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

    What I find interesting is they somehow found a right for gays to marry in the constitution, but can't seem to find the right to keep and bear arms.....



    Note: I am not against gay marriage, I simply do not care other than to say the government has no right to tell you who you can or cannot marry.


    Matthew 10:34
    Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

  6. #656
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    46,113

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeTrumps View Post
    it's not just this issue
    if you don't agree with the liberal agenda you are not only wrong, you are evil. that is their mindset. it also happens to be the mindset of a small child. and we have to deal with these people and these situations. its.......not fun
    Fun schmun. Look I understand what you are saying but you cant combat that mindset,so dont try. Frankly...its not even worth the battle. They arent interested in it so why should you be?

    I love some of the exchanges. YOu conservatives and your religious beliefs! Yes..but my beliefs mirror Obama's...and up until a few years ago my beliefs mirrored his political position as well and you VOTED for him. Yeah...but THATS DIFFERENT!



    Come on...that ****s just funny. You have to be able to see that stuff and then see them for who and what they are.

  7. #657
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,912

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeTrumps View Post
    5 lawyers just changes the definition of marriage. you can dodge that obvious fact all you want. It happened. That does not mean it is right, it's just what happened. and the liberals vote in a sheep-like block on all this issues anyway. \
    they ignored the words in the constitution in the Obamacare ruling, yet today they are defend it, is that your warped theory?
    The definition of marriage was changed by people, a lot of people, using it to describe same sex couples in the same type of relationship as married opposite sex couples.
    "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. #658
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Last Seen
    10-12-16 @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,849

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    Apparently my earlier questions about multiple marriage restrictions were answered as Roberts said the majority opinion opens the door for legal multiple marriages
    A dissenting opinion, even from the Chief Justice, does not hold any jurisprudential value. So no, any future challenge to polygamy laws would still need to address the previous Supreme Court holdings which note the State's legitimate interest in limiting fraud through the application of multiple licenses and obtaining the tax and inheritance benefits. You can try, again, to find language within the majority's opinion (and unlike the Chief Justice, stick to actual quotes as opposed to selectively edited quotes) to support new arguments, but I do not believe they exist.

  9. #659
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    11-07-16 @ 11:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    1,552

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    I know what Satan likes and he's loving today's ruling.
    churchlady.jpg

  10. #660
    Sage
    Anthony60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,096

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    I could start my own wine company with the collective amount of sour grapes being expressed over this decision...
    That would be a pretty crappy wine company, since you would have no wine. In other words, you are applying that old saying incorrectly.

    Unless, of course, your premise is that anyone that disagrees with the ruling really agrees with it but are saying it is no good because they won't ever be able to be in a gay marriage. Is that what you mean? Because that's what you are saying.
    "We have met the enemy and they are ours..." -- Oliver Hazard Perry
    "I don't want a piece of you... I want the whole thing!" -- Bob Barker

Posting Permissions

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