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 ljadw View Post
    The ruling of Scotus is illegal:Scotus has no right to make a new law,Scotus can only declare that an existing law is illegal .Thus NO ONE has the duty,or even the right to obey the dictate from 5 liberal judges who think that they rule the country .

    If tomorrow the same 5 are pontificating that males have no right to inherit,but that everything must go to females,Crash will say that prosecutors and judges must enforce the law of Scotus .
    That is exactly what they did. Are you confused?
    “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 ruling of Scotus is illegal:Scotus has no right to make a new law,Scotus can only declare that an existing law is illegal .Thus NO ONE has the duty,or even the right to obey the dictate from 5 liberal judges who think that they rule the country .

      If tomorrow the same 5 are pontificating that males have no right to inherit,but that everything must go to females,Crash will say that prosecutors and judges must enforce the law of Scotus .
      I believe you read English as well as you write it....The bold part is EXACTLY what happened.

      #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 Crash View Post
        I did read....seem some are happy that the State of Texas will continue to discriminate against gays. Can't you admit are you at least a bit pleased?

        What is next? Texas State officials use their 1st Amendment rights to discriminate against disabled, women, Jews, Blacks, Hispanics?? Why stop at gays if their prejudices are protected by the 1st Amendment? Why can't a State employee sue to add everybody they hate to the discrimination list?
        Learn to read English.


        Originally posted by Crash
        Honestly, With all your tiny dogs I'm surprised you're not discriminated against daily....Surely you must have first hand experience knowing what it feels like to be discriminated against for being a gay man. Hahahahahha
        They are a well-trained and highly disciplined pack of attack dogs...

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

        Comment


        • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
          Learn to read English.
          So you're not the least bit pleased reading that Texas government officials will continue to discriminate..and prosecutors will not enforce the supreme laws of the land...based entirely on their own prejudices? How wonderful is that!!

          How come it's only a one way street with you? You believe gay marriage will open the doors to bestiality...so why won't discrimination backtrack the opposite way? Why can't Texas employees now discriminate against women, disabled, Catholics, Hispanics, Jews, Blacks....whomever the feel like?

          Why even have laws if you have religion?
          They are a well-trained and highly disciplined pack of attack dogs...
          Hahahha
          Last edited by Crash; 29 Jun 15, 10:22.
          #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


          • Bravo!

            Originally posted by Bow View Post
            Geez!! some of you guys sure seem to get paranoid about gay marriage.....what problems did this decision ever create......dont recall any gay people being mass killers, child abusers,wife beaters,human trafficars etc,etc,etc....but I guess this was ok as long as the participants are so called ' straight"

            Having my morning cafe'

            Near Toulos france





            I find most people are quite reasonable after a cup.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Crash View Post
              So you're not the least bit pleased reading that Texas government officials will continue to discriminate..and prosecutors will not enforce the supreme laws of the land...based entirely on their own prejudices? How wonderful is that!!
              They won't be discriminating against anyone. There are no "supreme laws of the land" which are enforceable by State, county or local officials.

              Originally posted by Crash
              How come it's only a one way street with you? You believe gay marriage will open the doors to bestiality...so why won't discrimination backtrack the opposite way? Why can't Texas employees now discriminate against women, disabled, Catholics, Hispanics, Jews, Blacks....whomever the feel like?

              Why even have laws if you have religion?
              Hahahha
              Texas constitution...
              Sec. 3. EQUAL RIGHTS. All free men, when they form a social compact, have equal rights, and no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments, or privileges, but in consideration of public services.

              Sec. 3a. EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW. Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed, or national origin. This amendment is self-operative.

              (Added Nov. 7, 1972.)


              Sec. 4. RELIGIOUS TESTS. No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.

              Sexual deviancy is not listed. Sex, race, color, creed and national origin are listed.

              Religious freedom is expressly protected...
              Sec. 6. FREEDOM OF WORSHIP. All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences. No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent. No human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience in matters of religion, and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious society or mode of worship. But it shall be the duty of the Legislature to pass such laws as may be necessary to protect equally every religious denomination in the peaceable enjoyment of its own mode of public worship.

              Marriage is defined as...
              Sec. 32. MARRIAGE. (a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
              (b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

              (Added Nov. 8, 2005.)


              The SCOTUS ruling renders Sec. 32 unenforceable. That is all that it does under Texas law.
              Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

              Comment


              • Republicans will be driven out of existence if they sink their heels in on this fight. It was lost in 2008, again in 2012, and now has been pushed past the point of no return.

                Drop the issue, or face obliteration in 2016.
                "I am the Lorax, and I'll yell and I'll shout for the fine things on earth that are on their way out!"

                ~Dr. Seuss, The Lorax


                "The trouble with Scotland...is that it's full of Scots!"

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wellington95 View Post
                  Republicans will be driven out of existence if they sink their heels in on this fight. It was lost in 2008, again in 2012, and now has been pushed past the point of no return.

                  Drop the issue, or face obliteration in 2016.
                  The SCOTUS ruling drops the issue from the campaign.
                  Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Crash View Post
                    I believe you read English as well as you write it....The bold part is EXACTLY what happened.

                    NO :it isn't : Scotus forced the states to adopt a law which does not exist :there is no law which is imposing the states to accept same sex marriage .

                    There is also no article of the constitution who is imposing the states to accept same sex marriage .

                    A ruling of Scotus is not a law .Only Congress can make a law .

                    Comment


                    • Scotus can say that a state law forbidding same sex marriage is violating the constitution (although there is no ground for such a statement) but Scotus can not impose same sex marriage on the states .

                      Section V of the 14th Amendment : Congress shall have the power to enforce,by appropriate legislation,the provisions of this article .

                      This meant

                      1) Congress has the power,not the duty to enforce the provisions

                      2)As Scotus is not mentionned,Scotus has not the power to impose the states a certain marriage law .

                      3) There is no ground for the claim of Scotus that a law narrowing marriage as an act between man and wife is unconstitutional. Equal protection does
                      not mean that 2 men or 2 women have the right to marry .There is no article in the constitution that forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation .
                      Equal protection does not give B the same rights as A .

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                        The SCOTUS ruling drops the issue from the campaign.
                        Not even close. It will play a major part in the GOP primaries.
                        “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
                          Not even close. It will play a major part in the GOP primaries.
                          Reining in SCOTUS will be a big issue... Protecting religious freedom will play a big issue... Gay marriage is now a non-issue.

                          There is no legislative way to undo this.

                          SCOTUS actually did the GOP two big favors last week.

                          This ruling makes gay marriage a moot point and the SCObamacare ruling averted a trainwreck, which the Dem's and the media would have hung around the GOP's neck.

                          These rulings take two rallying points for lib's out of play... While the jucicial activism will fire up the GOP base.
                          Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                            Reining in SCOTUS will be a big issue... Protecting religious freedom will play a big issue... Gay marriage is now a non-issue.

                            There is no legislative way to undo this.

                            SCOTUS actually did the GOP two big favors last week.

                            This ruling makes gay marriage a moot point and the SCObamacare ruling averted a trainwreck, which the Dem's and the media would have hung around the GOP's neck.

                            These rulings take two rallying points for lib's out of play... While the jucicial activism will fire up the GOP base.
                            You can pretend points one and two don't depend on point three, but the candidates will not treat them like that at all. You can read it everyday since the decision was handed down.
                            “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


                            • There is no law saying that it is illegal to deny certain people the right to marry,thus it is legal to deny certain people the right to marry:

                              most states deny the right to marry on ground of age,on ground of mental health,on ground of consanguinity,certain states on ground of sexual orientation.

                              All these reasons are legal,because there is no law that making them illegal .
                              The 14th Amendment does not mention the right of certain people to marry .

                              If there was a state forbidding man and woman to marry ,saying that only the same sex marriage was allowed, it still would be legal .

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                                You can pretend points one and two don't depend on point three, but the candidates will not treat them like that at all. You can read it everyday since the decision was handed down.
                                It is a dead issue...
                                Rand Paul silent on gay marriage ruling
                                By DANIEL STRAUSS 6/27/15 5:05 PM EDT

                                Ted Cruz called for impeachment. Bobby Jindal said he’d “just get rid of the court” entirely. Scott Walker floated a constitutional amendment. Mike Huckabee hinted at civil disobedience.


                                But well over 24 hours after the Supreme Court’s historic ruling making same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states, one Republican 2016 candidate has thus far remained silent: Rand Paul.

                                [...]

                                Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...#ixzz3eTPt2WUf

                                I'd love to see at least 5 SCOTUS justices impeached and removed from the bench... Barring the GOP getting 67 Senate seats, it can't happen. Even then, it probably can't happen.

                                A constitutional amendment defining marriage would be a nice plank in the platform.

                                Civil disobedience... Already underway.

                                The left got their gay marriage. This rallying point is gone for them. Barring, an unprecedented GOP landslide, this can't be undone.

                                However, the unconstitutional behavior of #OccupyWhiteHouse and rampant judicial activism will be excellent rallying points for the GOP base.
                                Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X