• 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!

Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses[W:344,535,718]

Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Ever hear of those? You are born with them, nobody gives them to you. I guess you believe that all men are not created equal.

The people who signed that document didn't think all men were created equal.
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Guess who is coming to the rescue of Judge Moore and the anti-gay bigots?




Yup.

"KKK issues “call to arms” over Alabama same-sex marriage ruling
The hate group melts down after a federal court rules an amendment banning same-sex marriage unconstitutional
...
"We as White Christians intend to see that no outside agitators bully or intimidate the White Christian majority in the State of Alabama...We salute those like the chief justice for standing against the Immoral, Ungodly and activist Federal Judges.”

http://www.salon.com/2015/02/14/kkk...ver_alabama_same_sex_marriage_ruling_partner/
 
Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses - ABC News




http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/us/gay-marriage-set-to-begin-in-alabama-amid-protest.html?_r=0
Alabama's Top Judge: Same-Sex Marriage Is Illegal in State - NBC News

awwwwwww poor judge has his fweelings hwurt and thinks he has the power to disregard the fed and constitution . . .

Way to keep it classy Roy! lol

I hope he is removed from office and he is banned from every participating in government law again. :D
Everyone calm your tits this is just a matter of procedure. Just like Illinois residents couldn't start carrying guns when Heller came down, but had to wait for the law to chance, so too do gays have to wait for the Alabama law to be changed.

Cool your jets, this is another non-story.
 
Oh, good, because I don't. For a minute there I thought you were calling me a bigot, which would be stupid.

I wasn't singling out anyone in particular. If the shoe fits, wear it...if it doesn't, then don't worry about it.
 
Everyone calm your tits this is just a matter of procedure. Just like Illinois residents couldn't start carrying guns when Heller came down, but had to wait for the law to chance, so too do gays have to wait for the Alabama law to be changed.

Cool your jets, this is another non-story.

Same sex marriage is legal in Alabama now. Those who refuse to issue licenses will be dealt with.
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Tell us ONE RIGHT that you get "organically" for being a living creature on this planet, and tell us how you get it.

There is no right. Nature doesn't give a frack about rights.

Rights come from forming together in a civilization and deciding what rights we will grant one another.

Before civilization? nada. nothing. Nature's a bitch.
Where is the right to free speech "granted"? Surely you can post the text of whatever law it was where we gave that right to one another.
 
Not sure I understand what you're trying to say here, but if you're talking about judges under her jurisdiction, they are not legally bound by the decision until they are enjoined by the court, but that's a fairly simple matter as it was for Davis (they would only be delaying things for a few extra days).

You're wrong. This is like trying to say that cops are only bound by a decision made if they are named in the case if it is a case dealing with police procedures or policies. That is not how the law works. It is not reasonable to assume that she would rule opposite of this ruling if another judge came through her court who had refused to allow a same sex couple to wed, which means requiring every single judge to go through to each receive a ruling is a huge waste of time and money, and why there is no reason to not expect this ruling to be binding on all.
 
It's not as easy as that, many are simply trying to do what's required under the law. They're getting sued for issuing licenses and sued for not issuing licenses. Many are just doing what their lawyers advise them to do. Most just want this to be over.

Yes, it is that easy, them acting like children. They couldn't possibly get into legitimate trouble for issuing marriage licenses, and they deserve to be sued for not issuing them, for not doing their job in accordance with the US Constitution, not the struck down laws of the Alabama constitution.
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

How tolerant are you of those that have the opinion that marriage is between a man and a woman only?

Anyone is free to have that opinion. It is when some want to push that opinion on everyone. Just as people are free to have the opinion that ugly people, stupid people, poor people, infertile couples, nonvirgins, atheists, pagans, non-Christians, old people, different age couples, interracial couples, or interfaith couples should not get married/be together even. That is their opinion to have. It quits being just their opinion though when they try to impose their opinion on others, impeding their rights.
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Where is the right to free speech "granted"? Surely you can post the text of whatever law it was where we gave that right to one another.

Think of it this way. How do we determine if someone's rights are being infringed upon? What has to be done to the person for that to happen, for that person to have "lost" their freedom of speech or religion?
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Where is the right to free speech "granted"? Surely you can post the text of whatever law it was where we gave that right to one another.

first amendment.

Other countries don't have it.

If there was some "inherent right" people would have free speech regardless of where they live.
 
You're wrong. This is like trying to say that cops are only bound by a decision made if they are named in the case if it is a case dealing with police procedures or policies. That is not how the law works. It is not reasonable to assume that she would rule opposite of this ruling if another judge came through her court who had refused to allow a same sex couple to wed, which means requiring every single judge to go through to each receive a ruling is a huge waste of time and money, and why there is no reason to not expect this ruling to be binding on all.
That is how the law works, sorry if you don't like it. The judge herself has explained this in her clarifying order. I've been over this twice already in this thread.
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

first amendment.

Other countries don't have it.

If there was some "inherent right" people would have free speech regardless of where they live.
Not if it's being infringed upon.
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

first amendment.

Other countries don't have it.

If there was some "inherent right" people would have free speech regardless of where they live.
Where in the first amendment? Can you post the actual text that "grants" a right to free speech?
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Sure, they always have. I don't know why they would want to, since marriage involves two people of the opposite sex.

So, you have no problem with states granting marriage licenses to same sex couples.
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Think of it this way. How do we determine if someone's rights are being infringed upon? What has to be done to the person for that to happen, for that person to have "lost" their freedom of speech or religion?
Let's not put the cart before the horse. A right first has to exist before it may be infringed. If we are not born with such a right, where is it given to us by the government?
 
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Where in the first amendment? Can you post the actual text that "grants" a right to free speech?

Ah, now you want to get into a wordsmithing battle! I can see it now. Because it says the govt won't abridge free speech, you'll argue that the right exists inherently.

Sorry. Doesn't. And I'm not going down that dreary road, especially since it has no relationship to this thread.
 
My bad, the order only forces a single judge to issue marriage licenses to four couples.

This is a clam made by Judge Roy this morning and I believe his supporters are carrying this "reasoning" forward....that an order from a judge is not adjudication of the law.

Judge Roy was pimping the reasoning that an order from the federal courts and even the Supreme court stay is not a "Law" and therefore does not trump current Alabama law ...UNTIL the entire case has been heard and ruled upon...and the state legislature "fixes" the law on the books with the NEW LAW...does this ban become null and void.

Judge Roy and his judicial reasoning is full of ****.


You are arguing that the Federal court judge's ruling only effected one probate judge...That is ridiculous. That is like saying the Supreme Courts' Row v Wade ruling only was meant for Norma Leah McCorvey's pregnancy.
 
Last edited:
This issue gets sticky in that the Supremacy Clause only applies to the 17 enumerated powers. The federal government is pretending it has the authority to regulate marriage, which they do not. So the Alabama may refuse to obey the federal ruling arguing that the states hold the power to make all rulings outside the specified realm of the federal government. Like it or not that is how our system was set up. Much of the power the federal government wields is not theirs and they only h ave it because We the People failed to tell them no.
 
Last edited:
This issue gets sticky in that the Supremacy Clause only applies to the 17 enumerated powers. The federal government is pretending it has the authority to regulate marriage, which they do not. So the Alabama may refuse to obey the federal ruling arguing that the states hold the power to make all rulings outside the specified realm of the federal government. Like it or not that is how our system was set up. Much of the power the federal government wields is not theirs and they only h ave it because We the People failed to tell them no.

The federal government is not telling Alabama what to do. The federal courts are. That is the difference. There is a Hierarchy to the laws in this county.

hierarchy.jpg
 
You are arguing that the Federal court judge's ruling only effected one probate judge...That is ridiculous. That is like saying the Supreme Courts' Row v Wade ruling only was meant for Norma Leah McCorvey's pregnancy.
Not ridiculous, it's even been acknowledged by the judge who issued the ruling. Roe v Wade was specific to that case as mandated by the Constitution's cases and controversies clause. The difference between that case and this one is that the legal interpretation in the Supreme Court ruling is binding on every court in the country, and a Federal district court ruling doesn't even bind courts in the same district.
 
Not ridiculous, it's even been acknowledged by the judge who issued the ruling. Roe v Wade was specific to that case as mandated by the Constitution's cases and controversies clause. The difference between that case and this one is that the legal interpretation in the Supreme Court ruling is binding on every court in the country, and a Federal district court ruling doesn't even bind courts in the same district.

ridiculous...


Judge Roy is not adjoined in any litigation before the Supreme court or any federal court on this matter. His authority is cases before the Alabama Supreme Court.

The state of Alabama went to the Supreme Court for the stay and it was denied.

the State of Alabama is the applicant...not Judge Roy. He has no legal standing in this matter. None.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses

Anyone is free to have that opinion. It is when some want to push that opinion on everyone. Just as people are free to have the opinion that ugly people, stupid people, poor people, infertile couples, nonvirgins, atheists, pagans, non-Christians, old people, different age couples, interracial couples, or interfaith couples should not get married/be together even. That is their opinion to have. It quits being just their opinion though when they try to impose their opinion on others, impeding their rights.

Correct that is the obvious difference.
Seems some how if you don't let people violate the rights of others that is intolerance. Hahaha
 
Back
Top Bottom