Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My prediction on the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
    No it did not. The right/freedom to marry predated SCOTUS, the Constitution and the United States of America.
    Are you suggesting that gay people didn't also union/marry before the Constitution of the US?


    "Today, we can say in no uncertain terms that we’ve made our union a little more perfect. That’s the consequence of a decision from the Supreme Court, but, more importantly, it is a consequence of the countless small acts of courage of millions of people across decades who stood up, who came out, who talked to parents -- parents who loved their children no matter what. Folks who were willing to endure bullying and taunts, and stayed strong, and came to believe in themselves and who they were, and slowly made an entire country realize that love is love. What an extraordinary achievement."
    President Obama.
    #occupyarmchairgeneral.
    Nothing is easier than self-deceit. For what each man wishes, that he also believes to be true. Demosthenes.
    Against logic there is no armor like ignorance. Laurence J. Peter

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sergio View Post
      I suppose you can show evidence that this happens with straight people in the forces as well?
      Sergio,

      It does happen, not all cases but service members do get married for the extra pay and allowances. This also gets them out of the barracks. Some units it is easier to 'move out in town' while other units it is extremely difficult. Marriage takes away the difficulty of getting authorization to live out in town.

      I was authorized to move out in town when I picked up SSgt, they gave me partial allowances and I moved in with another SSgt. When I got married I then received full allowances.

      Looking for an example; Dakota Meyers looks like he had a 'barracks' marriage.
      "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Crash View Post
        Are you suggesting that gay people didn't also union/marry before the Constitution of the US?


        [...]
        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
          Incorrect, ample examples to choose from in exactly how the 14th applies to situations like this. Been laid out for 60+ years.
          Nonresponsive and non sequitur.

          Legal limiting principles cannot be arbitrary and capricious. If the 14th Amendment requiresolution the redefinition of marriage to include homosexual couples, it also must include incestuous couples and polygamous permutations... Otherwise the limiting principle is arbitrary and capricious.
          Last edited by The Doctor; 27 Jun 15, 14:24.
          Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
            I see : the old trick when one has no argument : opposing gay marriage = homophobia,hatred,bigotry ..
            That is a Type II Progressive response to an argument counter to their position: The ad hominem attack.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Crash View Post
              Are you suggesting that gay people didn't also union/marry before the Constitution of the US?


              "Today, we can say in no uncertain terms that we’ve made our union a little more perfect. That’s the consequence of a decision from the Supreme Court, but, more importantly, it is a consequence of the countless small acts of courage of millions of people across decades who stood up, who came out, who talked to parents -- parents who loved their children no matter what. Folks who were willing to endure bullying and taunts, and stayed strong, and came to believe in themselves and who they were, and slowly made an entire country realize that love is love. What an extraordinary achievement."
              President Obama.
              You must be very desperate to use a statement of Obama as argument .

              Comment


              • The Founding Fathers knew that the Federal Government would try to increase its power at the expense of the states and of the individual citizens. To counter this danger they created the Supreme Court who should protect the citizens and the states against a tyrannical government .

                But,since decennia Scotus has become a monster of Frankenstein with as aim to take away as much as possible the rights of the states and the citizens,and now,it has clearly entered illegality by violating the constitution of which it should be the watchdog:it has made a law making same sex marriage compulsary in all states ,and this,while only Congress has the power to elaborate laws .
                It is very obvious why it has done this : the liberals knew that there was no majority to impose same sex marriage on the country by using the legal Congress way (otherwise they would have tried it) thus they tried to impose it via a loophole : the 5 liberals of Scotus .

                There is only one way to prevent Scotus to make more mischief : Congres and the next president must curb the wings of this monster or(and that would be the ideal solution)abolish it .Otherwise the US will finish as the European Union where democracy has disappeared and is replaced by a liberal (=centralist) government .

                Comment


                • It will be interesting seeing how people will react when the pro-gun lobby uses this to take fight against the current CCW restrictions.
                  "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                    It will be interesting seeing how people will react when the pro-gun lobby uses this to take fight against the current CCW restrictions.
                    They wont file anything. See they have lawyers that understand why the two subjects have nothing to do with each other.
                    “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                    “To talk of many things:
                    Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                    Of cabbages—and kings—
                    And why the sea is boiling hot—
                    And whether pigs have wings.”
                    ― Lewis Carroll

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
                      The Founding Fathers knew that the Federal Government would try to increase its power at the expense of the states and of the individual citizens. To counter this danger they created the Supreme Court who should protect the citizens and the states against a tyrannical government .

                      But,since decennia Scotus has become a monster of Frankenstein with as aim to take away as much as possible the rights of the states and the citizens,and now,it has clearly entered illegality by violating the constitution of which it should be the watchdog:it has made a law making same sex marriage compulsary in all states ,and this,while only Congress has the power to elaborate laws .
                      It is very obvious why it has done this : the liberals knew that there was no majority to impose same sex marriage on the country by using the legal Congress way (otherwise they would have tried it) thus they tried to impose it via a loophole : the 5 liberals of Scotus .

                      There is only one way to prevent Scotus to make more mischief : Congres and the next president must curb the wings of this monster or(and that would be the ideal solution)abolish it .Otherwise the US will finish as the European Union where democracy has disappeared and is replaced by a liberal (=centralist) government .
                      Please lets list the WORST violations of individual rights that this nation has witnessed and then lets list the source, state or fed. Want to bet on the outcome?
                      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                      “To talk of many things:
                      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                      Of cabbages—and kings—
                      And why the sea is boiling hot—
                      And whether pigs have wings.”
                      ― Lewis Carroll

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                        Nonresponsive and non sequitur.

                        Legal limiting principles cannot be arbitrary and capricious. If the 14th Amendment requiresolution the redefinition of marriage to include homosexual couples, it also must include incestuous couples and polygamous permutations... Otherwise the limiting principle is arbitrary and capricious.
                        Not at all. Because your trying to use forum debate logic to cover legal case law etc. It doesn't work that way. Getting a wee bit embarrassing....
                        “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                        “To talk of many things:
                        Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                        Of cabbages—and kings—
                        And why the sea is boiling hot—
                        And whether pigs have wings.”
                        ― Lewis Carroll

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                          They wont file anything. See they have lawyers that understand why the two subjects have nothing to do with each other.
                          14th Amendment Due Process Clause
                          "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                          Comment


                          • Those who claim incest, pedophilia, bestiality, polygamy, etc. in marriage would never occur should also remember for many people, they never thought the day would come when that marriage equality would become a reality. But it has happened. It is now a reality. Once you consider that, then all other things become possible.

                            Marriage as a term is now meaningless, it can now mean anything to any person. Once you give a right to a specific group, you have to give the right to every other group for that is the ONLY way to be fair to everyone. The ruling opens floodgate on how marriage can be defined.
                            Major James Holden, Georgia Badgers Militia of Rainbow Regiment, American Civil War

                            "Aim small, miss small."

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                              Not at all. Because your trying to use forum debate logic to cover legal case law etc. It doesn't work that way. Getting a wee bit embarrassing....
                              Every time you start losing an argument you start claiming that the opposition is embarrassing themselves. You've become predictable in that regard.
                              A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                                Please lets list the WORST violations of individual rights that this nation has witnessed and then lets list the source, state or fed. Want to bet on the outcome?
                                I'd say feds.

                                Trail of tears. Forcibly moving thousands of Cherokee to Oklahoma.
                                Internment of Japanese citizens.
                                The many violations of treaties and such in the Indian wars.
                                Segregation in the military

                                The states were small peanuts compared to the feds.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X