Page 35 of 38 FirstFirst ... 253334353637 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 373

Thread: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Showdow

  1. #341
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    LOL.....There may be a lot of things that the founding fathers didn't envision....perhaps like the right-wing evangelicals desire to push their social agenda on the country. The bottom line is that the founding fathers recognized that there are certain rights that are inalienable and fundamental and that all people in this country are entitled to due process and equal protection. Liberty and Justice for all....not just some. THAT is what people of your ilk continue to conveniently forget when engaged in all your bible thumping and crying.
    Pure hyperbole

    The Founders never even conceived of something as absurd as Gay Marriage. It's hilarious that you're even seriously implying that Gay Marriage is an "inalienable right". Nice try but not a chance.

    Gays being granted special rights has nothing to do with equality, liberty or justice. If homosexual sex had a purpose evolution would have found it by now and adapted accordingly.

  2. #342
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Gays being granted special rights has nothing to do with equality, liberty or justice
    Each time I see you type this I'm going to ask the same question.

    What "special right" is being granted to gays that YOU yourself can't do as well?

    HINT: It's not a special right.

  3. #343
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Each time I see you type this I'm going to ask the same question.

    What "special right" is being granted to gays that YOU yourself can't do as well?

    HINT: It's not a special right.
    Of course it's a special right. Gays are demanding the right above all other groups based on deviant sexual behavior to change the definition of Marriage (as it's always been known historically in the broadest sense and broadest notion) from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ?

    What makes them so special? Yea I get that it that Lady Gaga tells you they are born that way so it's cool and trendy, but we know scientifically homosexuality is not genetic, so what gives Homosexuals the right to change the definition of words and the right to change the oldest traditions and institution of the Human Race over transgendered, polygamists and even pedophiles. Muslims love marrying 9 year old girls. I thought the Left loved Muslims? You going to deny Muslims the religious Freedom to marry children? Bigot.

  4. #344
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Pure hyperboleThe Founders never even conceived of something as absurd as Gay Marriage. It's hilarious that you're even seriously implying that Gay Marriage is an "inalienable right". Nice try but not a chance. Gays being granted special rights has nothing to do with equality, liberty or justice. If homosexual sex had a purpose evolution would have found it by now and adapted accordingly.
    Sorry Charlie....but you are just plain wrong. The right to marry is a fundamental right (Loving v. Virginia). The SCOTUS took the first step in DOMA and CLEARLY indicated that while States currently remain free to define marriage as they see fit, the MUST do so in ways that do not violate the equal protection clause of the US Constitution. The groundwork has been laid for the next challenge. The only hope that your side has is that a case doesn't make it to the Supreme Court in the next 3 years....that Obama will not replace Ginsburg during his term and that the Republicans will win the next Presidential election and will be able to replace Ginsburg with a right-wing activist judge. Its not going to happen. You've lost this war.......I suggest that you move on to other issues that you might actually have a chance with.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  5. #345
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Of course it's a special right. Gays are demanding the right above all other groups based on deviant sexual behavior to change the definition of Marriage (as it's always been known historically in the broadest sense and broadest notion) from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ?What makes them so special? Yea I get that it that Lady Gaga tells you they are born that way so it's cool and trendy, but we know scientifically homosexuality is not genetic, so what gives Homosexuals the right to change the definition of words and the right to change the oldest traditions and institution of the Human Race over transgendered, polygamists and even pedophiles. Muslims love marrying 9 year old girls. I thought the Left loved Muslims? You going to deny Muslims the religious Freedom to marry children? Bigot.
    Oh....are you forgetting that the term marriage has meant numerous things historically throughout the history of the world....and even more recently in the US meant marriage between two people of the same race? My guess is that you just conveniently left that out....along with the fact that large numbers of the US viewed inter-racial relationships as devious and perverse.....Oops....left that one out....
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  6. #346
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Of course it's a special right. Gays are demanding the right above all other groups based on deviant sexual behavior to change the definition of Marriage (as it's always been known historically in the broadest sense and broadest notion) from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ?

    What makes them so special? Yea I get that it that Lady Gaga tells you they are born that way so it's cool and trendy, but we know scientifically homosexuality is not genetic, so what gives Homosexuals the right to change the definition of words and the right to change the oldest traditions and institution of the Human Race over transgendered, polygamists and even pedophiles. Muslims love marrying 9 year old girls. I thought the Left loved Muslims? You going to deny Muslims the religious Freedom to marry children? Bigot.
    They're not requesting a special right, because if gay marriage is legalized YOU TOO can marry someone of the same sex.

    And no, you don't know scientifically, because it's not a consesus that homosexuality isn't caused by genetics. You cannot say that as FACT. SHOW ME THE PROOF that ALL scientists have a consesus that homosexuality is not due to genetics. YOU CAN'T. The only thing you can say is they haven't found proof. Another failed argument from you.

    And you are going on the slippery slope of pedophiles, here's a hint, children and animals CANNOT LEGALLY CONSENT. So your arguments fall flat again.

    And can you please show us as FACT where YOU OWN the word marriage? I'm curious on that to since you think you do.

    Bottom line, all your arguments are a big fail.

  7. #347
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Sorry Charlie....but you are just plain wrong. The right to marry is a fundamental right (Loving v. Virginia). The SCOTUS took the first step in DOMA and CLEARLY indicated that while States currently remain free to define marriage as they see fit, the MUST do so in ways that do not violate the equal protection clause of the US Constitution. The groundwork has been laid for the next challenge. The only hope that your side has is that a case doesn't make it to the Supreme Court in the next 3 years....that Obama will not replace Ginsburg during his term and that the Republicans will win the next Presidential election and will be able to replace Ginsburg with a right-wing activist judge. Its not going to happen. You've lost this war.......I suggest that you move on to other issues that you might actually have a chance with.
    Marriage is not a fundamental right. SCOTUS is 9 activist judges in black robes. They aren't Gods and even then it was a close vote. You're even admitting once they stack the court with activist biased judges, that you'll get your way.

    Gay Marriage not in The Constitution. The Founders didn't leave it open to interpretation so gays could get married. Sorry Charlie. The Founders would be repulsed and offended by Gay Marriage and rightly so. It's an abomination. It's doesn't follow Natural Order. It doesn't follow Natural Law.

    The States should decide. You're not really for equality. If you're for equality then how about unisex bathrooms. How about Muslims marrying 8 year olds. You don't hate Muslims do you? How about transgendered homosexual marriage? What would we even call that? How about people marrying their pets. You read the stories. millionaire hag leaves millions to dog. Well they want that contract. They want that legal contract. Equality. How about a father marrying his adult son? Equality right? The concept of equality is Marxist propaganda. It's the same social justice gobblygook that alinskyites have been preaching for years. You get away with it because The Left controls The Indoctrination Public School system, Pop Culture, The Media, everything. Parents don't get to choose the morals and values their children learn. The Federal Government now decides. In reality people like you are fascists, pushing your own brand of dirty "morality" on the rest of society.

    People like you always sneer about Bible Thumping as you run around Gay Thumping, lecturing everyone how awesome, cool, hip and trendy dirty filthy sodomy is. I find the hypocrisy laughable.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    They're not requesting a special right, because if gay marriage is legalized YOU TOO can marry someone of the same sex.
    Only because they were given the special right to change the definition of Marriage from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ?

    Bottom line, all your arguments are a big fail

  8. #348
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Marriage is not a fundamental right. SCOTUS is 9 activist judges in black robes. They aren't Gods and even then it was a close vote. You're even admitting once they stack the court with activist biased judges, that you'll get your way.

    Gay Marriage not in The Constitution. The Founders didn't leave it open to interpretation so gays could get married. Sorry Charlie. The Founders would be repulsed and offended by Gay Marriage and rightly so. It's an abomination. It's doesn't follow Natural Order. It doesn't follow Natural Law.

    The States should decide. You're not really for equality. If you're for equality then how about unisex bathrooms. How about Muslims marrying 8 year olds. You don't hate Muslims do you? How about transgendered homosexual marriage? What would we even call that? How about people marrying their pets. You read the stories. millionaire hag leaves millions to dog. Well they want that contract. They want that legal contract. Equality. How about a father marrying his adult son? Equality right? The concept of equality is Marxist propaganda. It's the same social justice gobblygook that alinskyites have been preaching for years. You get away with it because The Left controls The Indoctrination Public School system, Pop Culture, The Media, everything. Parents don't get to choose the morals and values their children learn. The Federal Government now decides. In reality people like you are fascists, pushing your own brand of dirty "morality" on the rest of society.

    People like you always sneer about Bible Thumping as you run around Gay Thumping, lecturing everyone how awesome, cool, hip and trendy dirty filthy sodomy is. I find the hypocrisy laughable.



    Only because they were given the special right to change the definition of Marriage from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ?

    Bottom line, all your arguments are a big fail
    LOL.....so much pent up anger and slippery slopes in one post. Dude.....sorry to tell you, but you better get use to it because it is coming regardless of how much bible thumping you do.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  9. #349
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    LOL.....so much pent up anger and slippery slopes in one post. Dude.....sorry to tell you, but you better get use to it because it is coming regardless of how much bible thumping you do.
    I have been reading your discussion with Bronson. Question 1: Is it, in your opinion, discrimination for the legal definition of marriage to exclude any two consenting adults of any status? Question 2: Is it, in your opinion, discrimination for the legal definition of marriage to exclude any three or more consenting adults of any status?

  10. #350
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Didn't loving v Virginia call marriage a fundamental right of mankind
    Yes, but again, that was simply flowery language without legal meaning. The court has no grant, even in the power they took for themselves, to determine fundamental rights or the rights of mankind as a whole.

Page 35 of 38 FirstFirst ... 253334353637 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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