• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

President Obama now says the Constitution protects same-sex marriage

That's your opinion, and one in which I'm not especially interested. I'm responding to apdst's original question, and I hope the explanation that Obama does not possess the powers to officially rule laws constitutional or unconstitutional settles both your and apdst's confusion.

Funny how you're so eager to examine to the nines a joking statement but ignore totally that somehow the constitution changed overnight in Obama's head.
 
Funny how you're so eager to examine to the nines a joking statement but ignore totally that somehow the constitution changed overnight in Obama's head.

It's not important to me that you feel that way since plenty of actual legal scholars and judges disagree with you. Apdst made a ridiculous post and your attempt to defend it is even more blatantly ridiculous.
 
Funny how you're so eager to examine to the nines a joking statement but ignore totally that somehow the constitution changed overnight in Obama's head.

You have to understand that they see Obama in the much the same way the Ancient Greeks saw Zeus. Obama gave birth to the goddess of law and justice from his head.
 
It's not important to me that you feel that way since plenty of actual legal scholars and judges disagree with you. Apdst made a ridiculous post and your attempt to defend it is even more blatantly ridiculous.

You misunderstand. It's not about how I feel, or my opinion. It's about Obama, a supposed constitutional scholar who studied the constitution thoroughly and somehow missed where it contained support for homosexual marriage when he was head of the law review. But now, when it's politically convenient, it's magic! Look what he found! :lamo
 
You misunderstand. It's not about how I feel, or my opinion. It's about Obama, a supposed constitutional scholar who studied the constitution thoroughly and somehow missed where it contained support for homosexual marriage when he was head of the law review. But now, when it's politically convenient, it's magic! Look what he found! :lamo

This discussion has been beaten to death infinity times and you know it. I'm sorry that after all those threads you still believe gay marriage isn't protected by the constitution, but it's not my problem. If you want, though, I can probably find a School House of Rock cartoon to explain the three branches of government or something.
 
This discussion has been beaten to death infinity times and you know it. I'm sorry that after all those threads you still believe gay marriage isn't protected by the constitution, but it's not my problem. If you want, though, I can probably find a School House of Rock cartoon to explain the three branches of government or something.

Nice dodge, no, it has nothing to do with my opinion of homosexual marriage and the constitution. Now it appears your misunderstanding is willful and an attempt to distract. This is about Obama's changing opinion of an unchanged document and you know it.
 
Nice dodge, no, it has nothing to do with my opinion of homosexual marriage and the constitution. Now it appears your misunderstanding is willful and an attempt to distract. This is about Obama's changing opinion of an unchanged document and you know it.

Did I enter this discussion because Obama changed his mind? No. I entered it because apdst was confused about the powers of the judiciary vs. the executive. Do you believe Obama has the power to rule laws constitutional or unconstitutional? Because you came to his defense before I even had a chance to edit out the spelling errors in my post, so I can only assume you share apdst's confusion.
 
Did I enter this discussion because Obama changed his mind? No. I entered it because apdst was confused about the powers of the judiciary vs. the executive. Do you believe Obama has the power to rule laws constitutional or unconstitutional? Because you came to his defense before I even had a chance to edit out the spelling errors in my post, so I can only assume you share apdst's confusion.

I'm not the topic of the thread.
 
Did I enter this discussion because Obama changed his mind? No. I entered it because apdst was confused about the powers of the judiciary vs. the executive. Do you believe Obama has the power to rule laws constitutional or unconstitutional? Because you came to his defense before I even had a chance to edit out the spelling errors in my post, so I can only assume you share apdst's confusion.

And still you dodge and distract. And then tell porkies. So, which point did you wish to discuss, because this goal post changing is making us all dizzy? How Obama changed his mind about what was in the constitution, or how you think it's okay for the POTUS to play at being a SCOTUS justice for the press?
 
Read more @: President Obama now says the Constitution protects same-sex marriage

I agree 100%! :applaud:applaud [/FONT][/COLOR]
The President is right only so far as being in reference to states that don't have a domestic partnership civil union statute call "homarriage" or whatever.

States that don't, they're stuck, and activist judges have (though erroneously) forced those states to apply the marriage domestic partnership civil union to same-sex unions.

This judicial activism, though, is simply that, and fails to do the right thing by all, including the constitution.

The right thing by all is for these judges to force such states to create homarriage (or whatever applicable name (of course other than "marriage") same-sexers want their relationships to be called) domestic partnership civil uions and to allow same-sex couples to be licensed under that statute.

For states that already have a homarriage statute, not The President, activist judges, or the constitution rightly compels those states to apply the inappropriate term marriage to same-sex union licensing.
 
And still you dodge and distract. And then tell porkies. So, which point did you wish to discuss, because this goal post changing is making us all dizzy?

I've always stuck to the same topic: your confusion about whether you and apdst literally believe that Obama has the power to rule laws unconstitutional. You're the one who wanted to discuss whether gay marriage is protected by the constitution, that Obama changed his mind, the weather in France, how many licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie roll, etc.
 
I never was.

Your original post suggests otherwise:

Obama is replacing SCOTUS, now?

And if you believe you were never confused before, it stands to reason that you still must be now. If so, let me put your fears to rest by saying that no, Obama does not possess the power to rule laws constitutional or unconstitutional, and therefore he is not replacing the SCOTUS. If there's anything else just let me know, because I'm here to help.
 
And still you dodge and distract. And then tell porkies. So, which point did you wish to discuss, because this goal post changing is making us all dizzy? How Obama changed his mind about what was in the constitution, or how you think it's okay for the POTUS to play at being a SCOTUS justice for the press?

Please note that Mr. Obama said "Ultimately I think" the Equal Protection Clause guarantees a right to same-sex marriage. First, he wasn't saying it does do that, but only that he thinks it does that. And second, he said he thought it ultimately does that. Before 2012, Mr. Obama probably thought the Equal Protection Clause did that only penultimately.
 
I've always stuck to the same topic: your confusion about whether you and apdst literally believe that Obama has the power to rule laws unconstitutional. You're the one who wanted to discuss whether gay marriage is protected by the constitution, that Obama changed his mind, the weather in France, how many licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie roll, etc.

Unfortunately for your attempted dodge, yet again, all the posts are here for all to see you're not telling the truth.
 
Your original post suggests otherwise:



And if you believe you were never confused before, it stands to reason that you still must be now. If so, let me put your fears to rest by saying that no, Obama does not possess the power to rule laws constitutional or unconstitutional, and therefore he is not replacing the SCOTUS. If there's anything else just let me know, because I'm here to help.

Do you know what "?" means? Ever hear of an interrogative statement?
 
Unfortunately for your attempted dodge, yet again, all the posts are here for all to see you're not telling the truth.

I'm not? So you do believe then that Obama has the power to rule laws unconstitutional? Wow, maybe I really do need to find a School House of Rock video for you.
 
Please note that Mr. Obama said "Ultimately I think" the Equal Protection Clause guarantees a right to same-sex marriage. First, he wasn't saying it does do that, but only that he thinks it does that. And second, he said he thought it ultimately does that. Before 2012, Mr. Obama probably thought the Equal Protection Clause did that only penultimately.

You see now that's a proper dodgy answer. One Obama's handlers would be proud of. Sounds like you have a talent for the press secretary spot. :mrgreen:
 
Do you know what "?" means? Ever hear of an interrogative statement?

Funny thing is, I've never needed to ask questions like "Can I fly?" or "Is Mars made of pepper chili sauce?" because to do so would imply a much deeper confusion on my part and cause for grave concern by others. In any case, I'll accept your post to imply that you're no longer confused on the separation of powers, I've done my job and I'm free to help others now.
 
I'm not? So you do believe then that Obama has the power to rule laws unconstitutional? Wow, maybe I really do need to find a School House of Rock video for you.

Of course not, was never even the topic, and your renewed attempts to obfuscate are noted by all here.
 
Thankfully not.

You said, "Is Obama replacing the SCOTUS?" Well, when Obama says "Such and such law is unconstitutional!" hits a gavel or something, and just like that a law is officially made unconstitutional, then yes, Obama will be replacing the SCOTUS. Until such time as that happens, then no, he is demonstrably not replacing the SCOTUS.

He effectively did that with DOMA, no?
 
Of course not, was never even the topic, and your renewed attempts to obfuscate are noted by all here.

Then why come after me when I tried to help apdst with his confusion? Instead of drawing this out for umpteen posts you and I together could have resolved his problem much more efficiently.
 
Funny thing is, I've never needed to ask questions like "Can I fly?" or "Is Mars made of pepper chili sauce?" because to do so would imply a much deeper confusion on my part and cause for grave concern by others. In any case, I'll accept your post to imply that you're no longer confused on the separation of powers, I've done my job and I'm free to help others now.

Judging the gibberish in your post, your only objective harassment and not discussion.
 
Back
Top Bottom