• 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!

South Carolina Supreme Court Halts Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

WCH said:
Gays and SSM
Click to expand...

so shows that show a connection to a devil?

or that people are conditioned into accepting homosexuality and ssm
 
WCH said:
We just don't want you stealing marriage. (holy matrimony)

That's about the only restriction we want.
Click to expand...

no one is banning hetero sexual legal marriage

and holy things are up to individuals already any way and no 1 is tying tot take away your religious ceremony or contract
 
it's just me said:
Yes, we should change the world because blarg, in his infinite wisdom and vast life experience, says so. And I don't treat gay marriage as "wrong", I treat it as non-existent. But if you want to keep telling the emperor how nice his new clothes are, feel free. Run along with the rest of the lemmings, now, you are going to miss your cliff.

It doesn't take courage to go along with the crowd, it takes courage to think for yourself.
Click to expand...

Well that supports Blarg quite solidly and calls into question your grasp of reality.

Since SSM is a reality in many states...including those that voted it in by popular vote.

I hope *everyone else * isnt delusional.
 
Navy Pride said:
The 14th amendment say nothing about SSM or any marriage and if the originators see what you are doing to it they would roll over in their graves.
Click to expand...

and that's relevant how?
 
WCH said:
One is race related while the other is sexual orientation. The only reason it's brought up is because there are religious persons who believe both are sinful. (and proponents need a leg to stand on)
I don't think interracial marriage is a sin.
Click to expand...

But many other Christians did/do and found ways to pervert and interpret the Bible to support their racist views. They believed/believe wholeheartedly that interracial marriage is an abomination. How are they different from you?
 
Navy Pride said:
It was never intended to address marriage of any kind.
Click to expand...

doesn't need to so long as their are laws concerning marriage they have to give people = protection
 
CriticalThought said:
I did not say anything about marriage. I asked if you consider same sex marriage bans to be laws or suggestions?
Click to expand...

They are the will of the people of the state who voted for them and no liberal activist judge should be allowed to overturn them.....To me its not against gays hooking up......call it anything you want just don't change the definition of marriage.
 
WCH said:
Oh now it's hate, intolerance and ignorance when before it was misinterpretation?

It's God's law which has been conveniently overlooked.
Click to expand...

God NEVER says you can hate other people. Ever. Or do them harm. As in denying them and their children the same things as other people.

Only HE can judge. And deny or not.

Living in America, we DO NOT discriminate. If your beliefs oppose that, too bad. But hey, no one is preventing you from living your own beliefs...are they?
 
blarg said:
doesn't need to so long as their are laws concerning marriage they have to give people = protection
Click to expand...

Your exactly right defined as a union between a man and a woman.
 
Navy Pride said:
They are the will of the people of the state who voted for them and no liberal activist judge should be allowed to overturn them.....To me its not against gays hooking up......call it anything you want just don't change the definition of marriage.
Click to expand...

nah no voting away peoples rights

its a marriage 2 people of the same can do anything you have to in order to get married its a legal marriage the definition of that word is going to reflect reality whether you like it or not

I hear that holy matrimony thing is still up for grabs on a personal level so you can exclude same sex couples form that all you like its just not binding to any one else
 
Navy Pride said:
Your exactly right defined as a union between a man and a woman.
Click to expand...

and between a man and a man and a woman and a woman because there all the same when it comes to what you have to be able to do to get hitched

and its not = protection to let men marry a woman but deny other women the same choice based on gender same thing with guys

should have learned this lesson form bans on interracial marriage
 
Lursa said:
God NEVER says you can hate other people. Ever. Or do them harm. As in denying them and their children the same things as other people.

Only HE can judge. And deny or not.

Living in America, we DO NOT discriminate. If your beliefs oppose that, too bad. But hey, no one is preventing you from living your own beliefs...are they?
Click to expand...



Jesus said love the sinner and hate the sin be they be straight or gay.
 
blarg said:
and between a man and a man and a woman and a woman because there all the same when it comes to what you have to be able to do to get hitched

and its not = protection to let men marry a woman but deny other women the same choice based on gender same thing with guys

should have learned this lesson form bans on interracial marriage
Click to expand...


I am a Roman Catholic and I have been taught love the sinner and hate the sin and since gays live in sin and can't marry in the eyes of the church they have a problem unless they remain celibate.
 
Navy Pride said:
I am a Roman Catholic and I have been taught love the sinner and hate the sin and since gays live in sin and can't marry in the eyes of the church they have a problem unless they remain celibate.
Click to expand...

all opinions that are meaningless to law and rights :shrug:
 
Navy Pride said:
I am a Roman Catholic and I have been taught love the sinner and hate the sin and since gays live in sin and can't marry in the eyes of the church they have a problem unless they remain celibate.
Click to expand...

ok the catholic church dose not need to call a ssm holy matrimony or consider it a marriage in a religious sense in their eyes but legal marriage is beyond its jurisdiction I this nation

gay marriage must still be legal under the 14 amendment
 
WCH said:
Oh now it's hate, intolerance and ignorance when before it was misinterpretation?

It's God's law which has been conveniently overlooked.
Click to expand...

Not overlooked. Accepted or rejected....as any American has the right to do.
 
blarg said:
ok the catholic church dose not need to call a ssm holy matrimony or consider it a marriage in a religious sense in their eyes but legal marriage is beyond its jurisdiction I this nation

gay marriage must still be legal under the 14 amendment
Click to expand...

show me in the 14th amendment where it says, in those words ssm must be legal....I won't hold my breath for your answer.
 
Navy Pride said:
show me in the 14th amendment where it says, in those words ssm must be legal....I won't hold my breath for your answer.
Click to expand...

I could show you the posts where your told the 14th amendment has to uphold = protection under the law for citizens
 
Navy Pride said:
and in most states the law is one man and one woman.
Click to expand...

wrong as usual LMAO

try again
wasnt it you that said it will never be more than 10 states, then 12 etc?

30 states have protected equal rights, so you are factually wrong
facts win again

and the reality is in ALL states equal rights is the law and there are a minority that are violating that law and the constitution.
 
Navy Pride said:
show me in the 14th amendment where it says, in those words ssm must be legal....I won't hold my breath for your answer.
Click to expand...

thank you for proving you dont understand the constitution, it doesnt have to say SSM, It says "LAW" and the illegal bannings are a law and they violated the 14th as facts, laws, rights and court cases already prove. Once again your post is 100% wrong.

by the failed logic in your post, rape can be made legal since "free from rape" is not in the constitution

facts win again
 
Last edited:
Kobie said:
The 14th Amendment is equal protection under law. SSM is an equal protection issue. Period, end of discussion.
Click to expand...

hears a good 1

o and as a bonus

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


hears the rest of it if you care to point out the part that says the amendment must mention specific laws in order for itself to be applied

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.[1]
 
blarg said:
hears a good 1

o and as a bonus

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


hears the rest of it if you care to point out the part that says the amendment must mention specific laws in order for itself to be applied

Section 1. All personsborn or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.[1]
Click to expand...

yep, LAW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom