Page 74 of 193 FirstFirst ... 2464727374757684124174 ... LastLast
Results 731 to 740 of 1930

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

  1. #731
    Randian PUA
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    12-03-16 @ 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 Samhain View Post
    Good luck proving that having a second husband or wife negatively affects children. The majority opinion never mentions respecting or allowing legitimate state interests to override the fundamental right to marriage.
    If you think this opinion overturned the doctrine of strict scrutiny, you obviously haven't read the opinion
    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..

  2. #732
    Sage
    WCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Lone Star State.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,202

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Harman View Post
    Masha Gessen:

    I agree that we should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it is a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. . . Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there, because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change, and again, I don’t think it should exist.

    I sometimes think that gay marriage advocates are acting in bad faith.
    I'm pretty sure they hate religion. Why shouldn't they, it calls them out for what they are.... sinners, deviants and perverts.
    32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
    Matt. 10:32-33

  3. #733
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    45,973

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    I'm pretty sure they hate religion. Why shouldn't they, it calls them out for what they are.... sinners, deviants and perverts.
    The only thing I hate about religion is people trying to force it on me.

  4. #734
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    11-20-16 @ 11:40 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,242

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    I'm pretty sure they hate religion. Why shouldn't they, it calls them out for what they are.... sinners, deviants and perverts.
    “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

  5. #735
    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 Taylor View Post
    I'd have agreed with you yesterday, but if you take a look at the majority opinion, it simply claims the right to marry is fundamental and all but ignores the question of a "legitimate state interest". Precedent schmecedent (as far as Kennedy is concerned at least). There's no reason to believe that a similar ruling could be made with respect to "marriage equality" for polygamists.
    This comes from a discussion of the new ruling over at Scotusblog: "A curious aspect of the new ruling was that, once again, Justice Kennedy did not spell out what constitutional test he was applying to a claim of gay equality. It simply discussed a series of court precedents, and his own recitation of notions of liberty, without saying what burden those challenging the bans had to satisfy before winning the right to equality."

    So it appears that you have some basis for worrying about extending the reasoning, but I would be hesitant to read the lack of a discussion of an explicit constitutional test as a reading that a constitutional test does not exist.

    By the way, I must admit that you were correct regarding my discussion of the most recent polygamist decision. I thought the Supreme Court had already issued a "cert. denied" order in regards to the Utah Supreme Court decision, but it appears that case is actually still awaiting an order from the circuit court.

  6. #736
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 04:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,652

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

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    You are depending now on the definition of "well known". I would argue that none of the cases are well known. The large majority of americans probably can't name even one of them



    At one time yes. At another time, no. Your original statement didnt specify any time so it was wrong.
    Semantics, semantics.. What I stated was correct.




    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...=1&oi=scholarr

    And no, it hasn't been overturned
    That was so 1879 ago.. Sheesh man get with the times.. Homosexuals were thrown in jail then too..





    And?



    Actually, the dissents are notably lacking in legal argument
    Ha! Define legal argument for us would you? Are you suggesting that the 4 dissenting justices lacked citation in their arguments? I suspect you didn't actually read it if that's your contention?

    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  7. #737
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 12:28 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,732

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

    I don't see anywhere where they challenged the ban on polygamy and bigamy as a violation of due process.

  8. #738
    Randian PUA
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    12-03-16 @ 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 CanadaJohn View Post
    Convenient how you dishonestly left out the part where I indicated that in the 21st century, marriage is no longer necessary for purposes of procreation and child rearing, but then I've come to expect nothing more.
    It doesn't have to be necessary for procreation and child rearing in order to be a legitimate government interest. It only needs to be beneficial to child rearing and procreation in order to be a legitimate government interest.

    In addition, marriage has other benefits in addition to those two
    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..

  9. #739
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,184

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    You're a foreigner, so it's understandable that you don't fully grasp all the details of the 14th amendment. Not all characteristics are protected in the same way.
    Well, slaves weren't equal in the US at one time. Free black people weren't equal in the US at one time. Women weren't equal in the US at one time. So, even though I'm a foreigner, I'm well aware of the illustrious history of the US as it relates to people being equal except when they're not.
    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.

  10. #740
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Last Seen
    12-09-15 @ 01:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    775

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MrT View Post
    Growing so fast that it went from 0.4% to 0.9% in 7 years.
    So the Muslim population grows at more than twice the rate. Factoring in other stuff (immigration, conversion, open borders) in 20 years the Muslim population will comprise 1/5 of the total population.

    .4 x 225=.9

    .9 x 300= 2.7

    2.7 x 500= a large number

    Next add in all the variables and coefficients and Muslims will be in the 100 millions or about one fifth of the total population,

    This isn't to mention the fact that they will soon be the majority in Europe

Posting Permissions

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