U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:30 AM
 
11,057 posts, read 3,735,317 times
Reputation: 5190

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
California and a bunch of other states that have passed the ban would overturn the ban if it were to come to a vote. However, someone's rights should never be up for a vote. It is an equal protection case and a violation of the 14th Amendment, which is why court after court is overturning the ban.

well bring it to a vote to the states....what is the use of the vote to amend the state constitution if federal activist judges will overturn the results if the PRO GAY MARRIAGE loses.

Where there's not a clear federal constitutional issue...then why should the federal courts intervene? Why should the Supreme Court intervene? The equal protection clause doesn't say the 'liberal promotion clause' or the 'radical egalitarianism clause,' where people can pour their economic, social and cultural agendas into the Constitution for the courts to decide.

The 14th Amendment, which contains the equal protection clause , does not mean "everybody is the same, everything is uniform," . It's not a "grab bag for every egalitarian dream on the face of the earth."




Looking at the amendment's history, it was passed as an "exclamation mark after the Civil War to make it clear once and for all that blacks are Americans, too, and they're to be treated as Americans in every state of the country. It had nothing to do with socialism. It had nothing to do with same-sex marriage; it had nothing to do with equal pay.

In 1967, the Supreme Court overturned Virginia's prohibition on interracial marriage, the issue was not marriage itself, it was a case of marriage being used to perpetuate segregation and racism.
The people in California voted to pass Proposition 8, to amend their constitution. Maybe in ten years they'll pass another proposition to reverse course. But there's no federal constitutional violation here. This is not the same as segregation and racism, this is not a matter of equal protection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:33 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 29,451,107 times
Reputation: 7830
I see Mittens is such a loser that he has even lost his own thread to people who don't understand that same sex marriage is on its way to becoming legal in all 50 states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:38 AM
 
11,057 posts, read 3,735,317 times
Reputation: 5190
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
Nonsense, Hellion1999. Folks who are logical notice demographic trends. They are the posters citing polling data you dislike which documents the GOP's issues with winning non-white votes in meaningful percentages.

Now you can join OldGlory in feeling you need not win far more of the non-white population, but in doing so, you'll be watching 2008 and 2012 POTUS results repeat..again and again.


why is it that people that you agree politically are "LOGICAL" and people you disagree are extremists?


is the ONLY election that matters to you is the POTUS? NON-WHITES only vote once every 4 years and ignore the rest of the government positions that affect their lives from governorships, state legislatures, house and senate?


you keep ignoring that Republicans control the MAJORITY of the governorships of the nation and state legislatures and control the house and senate which have more control over people and their economy than the POTUS.

How long will the democrats take the non-white vote for granted?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:39 AM
 
11,057 posts, read 3,735,317 times
Reputation: 5190
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
I see Mittens is such a loser that he has even lost his own thread to people who don't understand that same sex marriage is on its way to becoming legal in all 50 states.

and you based this on what?......has the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:41 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
18,978 posts, read 15,448,756 times
Reputation: 3946
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
well bring it to a vote to the states....what is the use of the vote to amend the state constitution if federal activist judges will overturn the results if the PRO GAY MARRIAGE loses.

Where there's not a clear federal constitutional issue...then why should the federal courts intervene? Why should the Supreme Court intervene? The equal protection clause doesn't say the 'liberal promotion clause' or the 'radical egalitarianism clause,' where people can pour their economic, social and cultural agendas into the Constitution for the courts to decide.

The 14th Amendment, which contains the equal protection clause , does not mean "everybody is the same, everything is uniform," . It's not a "grab bag for every egalitarian dream on the face of the earth."




Looking at the amendment's history, it was passed as an "exclamation mark after the Civil War to make it clear once and for all that blacks are Americans, too, and they're to be treated as Americans in every state of the country. It had nothing to do with socialism. It had nothing to do with same-sex marriage; it had nothing to do with equal pay.

In 1967, the Supreme Court overturned Virginia's prohibition on interracial marriage, the issue was not marriage itself, it was a case of marriage being used to perpetuate segregation and racism.
The people in California voted to pass Proposition 8, to amend their constitution. Maybe in ten years they'll pass another proposition to reverse course. But there's no federal constitutional violation here. This is not the same as segregation and racism, this is not a matter of equal protection.
1. Court after Court Judge after Judge Democratic appointees and Republican appointees disagree with you on this. It absolutely is a Constitutional issue and the bans violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

2. If California or a bunch of the other states voted again on the issue the band would be overturned in many cases as it was in Maine in 2012 after the ban was put in place in an off year election 3 years sooner. The American public has changed considerably on the issue in a short period of tIme. However rights should never come up for a vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:42 AM
 
Location: NJ
18,677 posts, read 17,033,468 times
Reputation: 7282
Helllion1999"is the ONLY election that matters to you is the POTUS"

In a "Mitts out" thread, YES. I'm going on the wild assumption (sar) he wasn't thinking about running for lower offices. Just a hunch (LOL).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:42 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,254 posts, read 13,998,263 times
Reputation: 6470
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
You just compared Romney to Biden, good job.
yep....many have done the multiple run and not get selected

Hillary ...already a one time loser
Romney....2 time loser
biden.....5+ time loser
McCain....too many to count

too many others, but I don't feel like looking them up

Last edited by workingclasshero; 01-31-2015 at 12:51 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:42 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 29,451,107 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
and you based this on what?......has the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on this?
You must not be paying attention, the Supreme Court will be ruling on this soon and with the way it has gone in smaller courts, I don't see them ruling any different. Civil Marriage is a fundamental right to all Americans, not just straight people. The Supreme Court doesn't care that you don't want gay people to be able to get married.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:44 AM
 
11,057 posts, read 3,735,317 times
Reputation: 5190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
1. Court after Court Judge after Judge Democratic appointees and Republican appointees disagree with you on this. It absolutely is a Constitutional issue and the bans violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

2. If California or a bunch of the other states voted again on the issue the band would be overturned in many cases as it was in Maine in 2012 after the ban was put in place in an off year election 3 years sooner. The American public has changed considerably on the issue in a short period of tIme. However rights should never come up for a vote.

and the courts and judges are divided.....the Supreme Court will decide this and whatever side they take it will be a 5 to 4 vote either way.....not a clear cut decision like you paint it to be.



if marriage is a right, why do you have to apply for it?......why have requirements by the states?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 12:45 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
18,978 posts, read 15,448,756 times
Reputation: 3946
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
and you based this on what?......has the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on this?
Well we will see for sure in a few months as the Supreme Court will likely rule on the matter in June. However, considering that so many of these bans have been overturned in federal and circuit court ( from Judges appointed by both parties) it seems likely all the bans will be struck down. My personal guess is by a 6-3 margin
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:49 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top