Page 89 of 193 FirstFirst ... 3979878889909199139189 ... LastLast
Results 881 to 890 of 1930

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

  1. #881
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,131

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

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    The bigots said the same exact thing about inter-racial marriage. Marriage will continue to exist as it always has...if anything if will be stronger as a result of this ruling.
    I haven't said a word about interracial marriage or bigots. And that is irrelevant to the point I am arguing. Do have a nice day.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  2. #882
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,131

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    They've never been explained. In fact, I know better than to ask you what those costs are because I know from years of experience that no answer would be coming.
    Already asked and answered even in this thread though. So those years of experience haven't helped much, have they.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  3. #883
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    22,700

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

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Would this be the same Constitution that Sen. John C. Calhoun's father refused to sign and become a Founding Father from South Carolina?
    With Sen. Calhoun being the father of the civil war with his "Nullification" Manifesto and description of slavery as for the "positive good" in 1830 .
    WTF does that have to do with this conversation?

  4. #884
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,131

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

    As it always goes in these discussions, there are those who are interested in actually discussing the topic and who are able to disagree civilly. I appreciate such people very much.

    And then there are the inevitable ones who want to make it personal, put words in people's mouths that they didn't say, put thoughts in their head that they didn't think, who build all manner of straw men and push the red herrings and non sequitur to ridiculous lengths. That makes it really difficult to have a comprehensive discussion of the topic.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  5. #885
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    25,337

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

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    A good lesson for those who think that elections don't matter. The next President will likely appoint at least 1 if not 2 to the Supreme Court. People should think very carefully before casting there ballot. If McCain or Romney had been elected....we wouldn't have this historic ruling today....that is for certain.
    If Justice Ginsburg doesn't make it to the next President, as she meets her Creator, with this term Creator used in our Constitution;
    The USSC will only have eight Justices at the start of the next Presidency, as this Senate will never approve another Obama appointee.

    And until then and after, the conundrum of a 4-4 USSC on rulings like today will be in effect.

    With the defection of Roberts and Kennedy to what I believe is their Libertarian view of the Constitution,
    we may not see a ninth Justice for many years to come.

    Unless the Senate and Presidency are held by the same party and the 51-vote nuclear option is instituted .
    Chemists Have Solutions .

  6. #886
    Magic!

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    24,594

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    Already asked and answered even in this thread though. So those years of experience haven't helped much, have they.
    Yeah, that's the kind of non-answer I've grown accustomed to receiving to that question.

  7. #887
    They took our jerbs!
    beerftw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    great state of texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    11,068

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JumpinJack View Post
    Just out: U S S.Ct. rules that there is a constitutional right to same sex marriage, going further than just ruling that states have to recognize it, if performed in a state where it's legal.

    This has an impact on the 14 states that have passed laws banning it.

    NOTE: The ruling was NOT just that states have to recognize it. The ruling is that it is now LEGAL, being constitutionally protected. It COULD HAVE made the ruling more narrow, but it did not. It went all the way. The matter is now settled. Gay marriage is legal, like interracial marriage is.

    NBC
    technically sc is right,the 14th demands equality under law unless it has been proven by due to process otherwise a reason why they should be denied the right.

    to date there has been no legal reason or even due process showing gay marriage as harmfull to society,hence the 14th amendment stands on the issue.gay couples can be prohibited from adopting by citing lack of evidence,but that will hold up in court only if studies are actually conducted to find out whether or not it affects kids.


    but as far as gay marriage,the only constitutional way to ban it is to ban marriage.the constitution protects many peoples rights,from gays to gun owners to people speaking their mind,i would have preferred a comprimised approach,as less backlash would have occurred,but either way i back the constitution,and its protections.
    “You can lead a horse to water, but it is probably crowded with all those people you taught to fish.”

  8. #888
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    25,337

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    WTF does that have to do with this conversation?
    Were you not discussing the Constitution?
    All of these decisions that GOPs don't agree with come down to a strong central Federal Government versus State's Rights.
    State's Rights have been taken to an extreme since Calhoun's 1830 Manifesto on "NULLIFICATION", which are on full display in 2015.

    As for Roberts and Kennedy, they may represent a "third" wing of what I believe is Libertarianism, swinging back-and-forth as a pendulum.
    I'd like to think of DEMs, GOPs and Libertarians on the USSC as three circles in a Venn Diagram.

    But a closer at the electoral ramifications shows that GOPs will benefit in the long run by the USSC's rulings on ACA and now gay marriage.
    Why are GOP politicians privately breathing a huge sigh of relief with today's ruling, knowing that a DEM issue is off the table?
    And you fully know the GOP base will be ginned up over gay marriage, as with the ACA ruling !
    Chemists Have Solutions .

  9. #889
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,389

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    I haven't said a word about interracial marriage or bigots. And that is irrelevant to the point I am arguing. Do have a nice day.
    Its not irrelevant at all....you just choose to ignore it. The reality is....the same exact argument that you are attempting to make is the same exact argument that the bigots made about inter-racial marriage, which also "changed' the definition of "traditional marriage". They predicted the destruction of the institution of marriage (which never happened). The truth is that their scare tactics are just old and boring.

  10. #890
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,389

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

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    If Justice Ginsburg doesn't make it to the next President, as she meets her Creator, with this term Creator used in our Constitution;
    The USSC will only have eight Justices at the start of the next Presidency, as this Senate will never approve another Obama appointee.

    And until then and after, the conundrum of a 4-4 USSC on rulings like today will be in effect.

    With the defection of Roberts and Kennedy to what I believe is their Libertarian view of the Constitution,
    we may not see a ninth Justice for many years to come.

    Unless the Senate and Presidency are held by the same party and the 51-vote nuclear option is instituted .
    I know others have made that threat.....the reality is that if Ginsberg retires and dies while Obama is President....the senate will be forced to confirm another justice (they can't read green eggs and ham forever and America won't put up with gamesmanship for long). My only fear is that Obama would choose somebody extremely moderate to appease them.

Posting Permissions

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