• 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!

Rick Santorum says supreme court's gay marriage decision not 'final word'

Anomalism said:
I'm not sure Mr. Santorum understands how this works.
Click to expand...

Actually, it seems he odes. I'm no fan of Santorum and routinely rip him, but in a general sense I agree with him here and he's right.

The Supreme Court is a CO-EQUAL part of Government. What's more, they cannot MAKE law, they can only interprit what is already there.

IE, they can find that the current laws regarding marriage are unconstitutional, but they can't pass a law stating you must allow gay marriage. While the end result may seem the same, it's not exactly.

In a general hypothetical sense, Santorum is right. The SCOTUS ruling on something is not somehow the "final word". Theoritically, the laws could be rewritten in a different fashion that the congress believes is in line with the constitution, and it would go back into effect. It would/could be challenged, and then the SCOTUS would need to decide on that particular law if it's constitutional or not. Another method that the other branches can take is to actually attempt and pass a constitutional amendment. Difficult, but feasible.

I don't like Santorum that much, but in this he's correct...the SCOTUS is not king, it is not the final word, it is a co-equal branch. The other branches do have methods of checks and balances that it can place upon the court, just as the court serves as one as well. That's the entire purpoes of the three co-equal branches. The other branches absolutely are within their right, and their intended purpose, to push back if they feel the SCOTUS over steps. Now I don't agree with some of the dirtier methods of pushing back...like one state's threat to withhold funding. But I have no issue with attempts to pass constitutional amendments, or even passing new law that the legislators believe adheres to the constitution.
 
Zyphlin said:
Actually, it seems he odes. I'm no fan of Santorum and routinely rip him, but in a general sense I agree with him here and he's right.

The Supreme Court is a CO-EQUAL part of Government. What's more, they cannot MAKE law, they can only interprit what is already there.

IE, they can find that the current laws regarding marriage are unconstitutional, but they can't pass a law stating you must allow gay marriage. While the end result may seem the same, it's not exactly.

In a general hypothetical sense, Santorum is right. The SCOTUS ruling on something is not somehow the "final word". Theoritically, the laws could be rewritten in a different fashion that the congress believes is in line with the constitution, and it would go back into effect. It would/could be challenged, and then the SCOTUS would need to decide on that particular law if it's constitutional or not. Another method that the other branches can take is to actually attempt and pass a constitutional amendment. Difficult, but feasible.

I don't like Santorum that much, but in this he's correct...the SCOTUS is not king, it is not the final word, it is a co-equal branch. The other branches do have methods of checks and balances that it can place upon the court, just as the court serves as one as well. That's the entire purpoes of the three co-equal branches. The other branches absolutely are within their right, and their intended purpose, to push back if they feel the SCOTUS over steps. Now I don't agree with some of the dirtier methods of pushing back...like one state's threat to withhold funding. But I have no issue with attempts to pass constitutional amendments, or even passing new law that the legislators believe adheres to the constitution.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this, but it still doesn't mean it is reasonable to believe that new laws that restrict marriage in a way to keep same sex couples from getting married is likely to pass or last, and a constitutional amendment doesn't have the support. There wasn't support for it 10 years ago, and there is probably half as much or less now.
 
roguenuke said:
I agree with all of this, but it still doesn't mean it is reasonable to believe that new laws that restrict marriage in a way to keep same sex couples from getting married is likely to pass or last, and a constitutional amendment doesn't have the support. There wasn't support for it 10 years ago, and there is probably half as much or less now.
Click to expand...

I agree with the later part. But it seemed Santorum was being mocked by some over the very generalized notion that the court isn't the "final word" or that there's nothing that could really be done. There's a difference between something being unlikely to be done and something simly being unable to be done. Santorum is correct in terms of the capacity of what he's talking about. The feasability of it in THIS INSTANCE is extremely low, but the general premise is correct.
 
Hatuey said:
The gay marriage issue has reached SCOTUS, gay marriage bans have been defeated over and over in different courts, DOMA is dead, DADT is dead, but somehow the anti-SSM side will gather up enough support for a constitutional amendment banning marriage. Oy vey. Talk about listening to too much Bon Jovi and hanging on to a prayer.
Click to expand...
I DO NOT think it should be pursued once the SCOTUS rules...BUT...prior to judges intervening, 37 states had some form of law or Constitutional Amendment against gay marriage and MOST of those were passed by HUGE majorities. IF it were to be pursued, the number of states required to ratify the amendment would be 38, and the federal judges wouldnt come into play. An amendment (especially one put to an actual vote of the people) is probably not as unlikely a prospect as you believe it to be.

That being said...like the Anti-abortion movement...once the SCOTUS decision is levied, I think its time for all parties to move forward.

Oh...wait...scary thought. What if (in the extremely unlikely possibility) the SCOTUS rules AGAINST gay marriage and FOR states rights to decide? Would you then advocate that all gay marriage advocates lay down their arms and accept the decision with grace?
 
VanceMack said:
I DO NOT think it should be pursued once the SCOTUS rules...BUT...prior to judges intervening, 37 states had some form of law or Constitutional Amendment against gay marriage and MOST of those were passed by HUGE majorities. IF it were to be pursued, the number of states required to ratify the amendment would be 38, and the federal judges wouldnt come into play. An amendment (especially one put to an actual vote of the people) is probably not as unlikely a prospect as you believe it to be.

That being said...like the Anti-abortion movement...once the SCOTUS decision is levied, I think its time for all parties to move forward.

Oh...wait...scary thought. What if (in the extremely unlikely possibility) the SCOTUS rules AGAINST gay marriage and FOR states rights to decide? Would you then advocate that all gay marriage advocates lay down their arms and accept the decision with grace?
Click to expand...

I know this was rhetorical, but still funny, none the less. :)

Tim-
 
It amazes me.

There's one part of me that wants to praise goobers like Santorum for being honest about their views even though they are becoming increasingly unpopular. But on the other hand I'm not sure that they really understand how unpopular their views are. They might honestly think that most people really hate and are grossed out by gay marriage. I'm not sure if they are anti gay marriage because it honestly interferres with their personal beliefs or if because they think it will help them get votes.

But it's just so damn easy to see that they are on the wrong side of history. Is anyone so blind that they honestly think there's a chance, even a 1% chance, that the tides are going to turn and the public are going to have a shift back to their view? That in reality, 100 years from now, the states that currently allow gay marriage will have reversed back and re-outlaw it, and none of the states that currently don't have it still won't have it? That asking "do you think two men should be able to get married?" in the future will be exactly the same as asking "Do you think that a black man should be able to marry a white woman?" is right now?
 
Rick Santorum...what a nutjob.

This guy has fathered eight children and he was so dumb (along with his equally stupid wife) that he fathered another child when his wife was 47-48. The child was born with Edwards syndrome, a chromosomal abnormality that is partially caused by advanced age of the mother.
How stupid do you have to be to risk birth defects on your child be having one at 48? And it is your 8'th one!?!


So, on top of being an idiot with ridiculous ideas for running the nation...he is a personal nutjob as well.
 
Last edited:
roughdraft274 said:
It amazes me.

There's one part of me that wants to praise goobers like Santorum for being honest about their views even though they are becoming increasingly unpopular. But on the other hand I'm not sure that they really understand how unpopular their views are. They might honestly think that most people really hate and are grossed out by gay marriage. I'm not sure if they are anti gay marriage because it honestly interferres with their personal beliefs or if because they think it will help them get votes.

But it's just so damn easy to see that they are on the wrong side of history. Is anyone so blind that they honestly think there's a chance, even a 1% chance, that the tides are going to turn and the public are going to have a shift back to their view? That in reality, 100 years from now, the states that currently allow gay marriage will have reversed back and re-outlaw it, and none of the states that currently don't have it still won't have it? That asking "do you think two men should be able to get married?" in the future will be exactly the same as asking "Do you think that a black man should be able to marry a white woman?" is right now?
Click to expand...

Sorry, it already has. Only the government is convinced homosexual marriage is a good idea, the people, not so much. The propaganda polling is absurd and they absolutely avoid polling in most states. Ask the next generation. On the playground something being called gay is not an endorsement, that's still the case.
 
roughdraft274 said:
But it's just so damn easy to see that they are on the wrong side of history. Is anyone so blind that they honestly think there's a chance, even a 1% chance, that the tides are going to turn and the public are going to have a shift back to their view? That in reality, 100 years from now, the states that currently allow gay marriage will have reversed back and re-outlaw it, and none of the states that currently don't have it still won't have it?
Click to expand...

Today, 61% of Republicans and Republican leaners under 30 favor same-sex marriage while just 35% oppose it. By contrast, just 27% of Republicans ages 50 and older favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry.

Young Republicans favor same-sex marriage | Pew Research Center

The GOP knows it's changing, but they also know most of their votes will come from the over 50 people. Older people tend to show up at the polls, younger people not so much.
 
VanceMack said:
I DO NOT think it should be pursued once the SCOTUS rules...BUT...prior to judges intervening, 37 states had some form of law or Constitutional Amendment against gay marriage and MOST of those were passed by HUGE majorities. IF it were to be pursued, the number of states required to ratify the amendment would be 38, and the federal judges wouldnt come into play. An amendment (especially one put to an actual vote of the people) is probably not as unlikely a prospect as you believe it to be.
Click to expand...

Continuing to repeat this will not change 60% of Americans supporting gay marriage or for that matter the feasibility of getting enough public support for gay marriage. It's almost like you're ignoring this little fact just to play some devil's advocate.

That being said...like the Anti-abortion movement...once the SCOTUS decision is levied, I think its time for all parties to move forward.

Oh...wait...scary thought. What if (in the extremely unlikely possibility) the SCOTUS rules AGAINST gay marriage and FOR states rights to decide? Would you then advocate that all gay marriage advocates lay down their arms and accept the decision with grace?
Click to expand...

Your usually thoughtless technique of trying to argue through hypothetical is getting boringly predictable. Have you seen anybody on the left be worried about SCOTUS doing anything other than ruling in favor of gay marriage supporters? Be serious. The only people who are already blowing the horn of Gondor over this are conservatives (Rick Sanctorum, Mike Huckabee) who scream about 'civil disobedience' because they see what is coming.

Supporters of gay marriage have kept this to the courts and time tested methods of demonstration and hey! they have won in various states and courts! Public opinion has shifted in their favor! People, for the most part, aren't as ready to attack homosexuals! That is the reality you live in VM. A reality where your imagined support for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage is not going to be supported by the overwhelming majority of the voters. Do you honestly think that in 2015, the states would gather enough support to ban gay marriage in the constitution when they can't even do so with public opinion? Get serious.
 
clownboy said:
Only the government is convinced homosexual marriage is a good idea, the people, not so much.
Click to expand...
Actually very much. It is really only the uneducated, the imbeciles and religious zealots who are opposed or feel threatened by it. That there are some parts of the country where such closed minded nut jobs constitute a local majority is just a sad aspect of reality, but in practice irrelevant to it.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Today, 61% of Republicans and Republican leaners under 30 favor same-sex marriage while just 35% oppose it. By contrast, just 27% of Republicans ages 50 and older favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry.

Young Republicans favor same-sex marriage | Pew Research Center

The GOP knows it's changing, but they also know most of their votes will come from the over 50 people. Older people tend to show up at the polls, younger people not so much.
Click to expand...

The bottom line is that SSM and a whole bunch of other things that should be legal (like pot) are only being held up by old people.

They will die relatively soon...and when they do their ridiculous views on these things will die with them.

I have a lot of friends that are old...but too many (though not all) of them hold onto dated ideas that have no place in the modern world.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Today, 61% of Republicans and Republican leaners under 30 favor same-sex marriage while just 35% oppose it. By contrast, just 27% of Republicans ages 50 and older favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry.

Young Republicans favor same-sex marriage | Pew Research Center

The GOP knows it's changing, but they also know most of their votes will come from the over 50 people. Older people tend to show up at the polls, younger people not so much.
Click to expand...

And there is absolutely no reason to believe their polling in this regard.
 
clownboy said:
Sorry, it already has. Only the government is convinced homosexual marriage is a good idea, the people, not so much. The propaganda polling is absurd and they absolutely avoid polling in most states. Ask the next generation. On the playground something being called gay is not an endorsement, that's still the case.
Click to expand...

Actually I have a number of junior high to highschool aged relatives, in Louisiana of all states. And just about every single one of them have a gay classmate or friend. When they hear the older family members discussing gay marriage and gay people, they look a them the same way that I looked at my grandparents when they tried to tell me about "the blacks". You don't want to correct them and be rude to your elders and very simply there's nothing you can say to change their opinion, but you still look at them with a kind of sadness and pity for them that they don't really understand how ignorant they are being.

As for you saying the polling is rigged, I'm sure you said the same thing right before the 2012 election. And I'm sure you as correct on this as you were on that.
 
Hatuey said:
Continuing to repeat this will not change 60% of Americans supporting gay marriage or for that matter the feasibility of getting enough public support for gay marriage. It's almost like you're ignoring this little fact just to play some devil's advocate.
Click to expand...

If that were at all true they wouldn't be mucking around in court but instead passing pro homosexual marriage legislation in every state. But of course, it isn't.
 
Paperview said:
Skewed polls!!!

That's what it is. All "o 'em -- Skewed!!

:lol:
Click to expand...


Poll a few folks in liberal counties in each state, or poll them all from a liberal state where homosexual marriage is already allowed by will of the people. Not to mention pollsters have always had the ability to frame the question for the answer they wish to produce.
 
prometeus said:
Actually very much. It is really only the uneducated, the imbeciles and religious zealots who are opposed or feel threatened by it. That there are some parts of the country where such closed minded nut jobs constitute a local majority is just a sad aspect of reality, but in practice irrelevant to it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, yeah, heard the insults before, coming from folks who hold your opinions they just don't mean much. I know you'll eventually grow out of your hatred of things traditional.
 
clownboy said:
If that were at all true they wouldn't be mucking around in court but instead passing pro homosexual marriage legislation in every state. But of course, it isn't.
Click to expand...

Majority popular opinion does not necessarily or for that matter regularly translate into majority votes. It's the downside of electoral colleges, majority will doesn't mean majority vote or for that matter majority power. The writing, however, is on the wall. Gay marriage is here to stay and as the years pass, the people who are most likely to support it keep growing and those who are most likely to oppose it continue to die off. If changing demographic trends are anything to go by, gay marriage is walking straight towards complete legalization and it's simply unfeasible to turn back the clock or put the genie back in the lamp. Any hope of a magic legislative bullet to solve the problem is wishful thinking at this point.
 
Kobie said:
:lamo

There are no tanks within sight of Baghdad!
Click to expand...

That was pretty funny. Now tell us, if public support is so high in reality, why do the people still vote against it in majority? Why does this have to be done through the courts in opposition to the people's vote?
 
Hatuey said:
Continuing to repeat this will not change 60% of Americans supporting gay marriage or for that matter the feasibility of getting enough public support for gay marriage. It's almost like you're ignoring this little fact just to play some devil's advocate.



Your usually thoughtless technique of trying to argue through hypothetical is getting boringly predictable. Have you seen anybody on the left be worried about SCOTUS doing anything other than ruling in favor of gay marriage supporters? Be serious. The only people who are already blowing the horn of Gondor over this are conservatives (Rick Sanctorum, Mike Huckabee) who scream about 'civil disobedience' because they see what is coming.

Supporters of gay marriage have kept this to the courts and time tested methods of demonstration and hey! they have won in various states and courts! Public opinion has shifted in their favor! People, for the most part, aren't as ready to attack homosexuals! That is the reality you live in VM. A reality where your imagined support for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage is not going to be supported by the overwhelming majority of the voters. Do you honestly think that in 2015, the states would gather enough support to ban gay marriage in the constitution when they can't even do so with public opinion? Get serious.
Click to expand...
'%s' mean precisely nothing as they are 'polls'. But...the plus side...if you are right this would be made manifest by a landslide, and it would be put to bed forever.

Your hysterical rant in response is cute. In case you have missed it...I'm not invested in this. Couldnt give half a damn to be completely honest. I fully expect the Supreme Court to rule in favor of gay marriage and will be glad when it is done and over with and I only wish they had had the guts to take this on a decade ago.

So...thats a YES BTW...right? You WOULD expect the pro-gay marriage side to just completely accept the SCOTUS decision as final...even if it goes against them. Glad to see we are all on the same page.
 
Hatuey said:
Majority popular opinion does not necessarily or for that matter regularly translate into majority votes. It's the downside of electoral colleges, majority will doesn't mean majority vote or for that matter majority power. The writing, however, is on the wall. Gay marriage is here to stay and as the years pass, the people who are most likely to support it keep growing and those who are most likely to oppose it continue to die off. If changing demographic trends are anything to go by, gay marriage is walking straight towards complete legalization and it's simply unfeasible to turn back the clock or put the genie back in the lamp. Any hope of a magic legislative bullet to solve the problem is wishful thinking at this point.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, there is no electoral college for direct vote initiative. What you're trying to avoid is saying the state legislatures, the closest direct representatives of the people show a reality that is out of odds with the propaganda polling.
 
clownboy said:
And there is absolutely no reason to believe their polling in this regard.
Click to expand...

IDK what to tell you. If you get out of your parent's basement more maybe you'd see that on this issue things are changing.

It's a poll from Pew, and they seem to have a good reputation. Just because you don't agree with their findings you think it's skewed and a big conspiracy between the government and the polling centers! I can only address that with sarcasm.
 
clownboy said:
If that were at all true they wouldn't be mucking around in court but instead passing pro homosexual marriage legislation in every state. But of course, it isn't.
Click to expand...

Um...

This is a list from 2013:


Delaware – Legislatively - 2013
District of Columbia – Legislatively - 2009
Hawaii – Legislatively - 2013
Illinois – Legislatively - 2013
Maine – Ballot – 2012
Maryland – Ballot - 2012
Minnesota – Ballot/Legislatively - 2012
New Hampshire – Legislatively - 2009
New York – Legislatively - 2011
Rhode Island – Legislatively - 2013
Vermont – Legislatively - 2009
Washington – Ballot - 2012 *

(there may be a few more since then, I'll have to check)

Nearly a third.

*Hattip to WorldWatcher
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom