Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 06-28-2015, 09:42 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
1,988 posts, read 2,224,583 times
Reputation: 1536

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945 View Post
I think the gays and lesbians have started dancing in the streets a little prematurely on this one. It may have been the courts decision, but the battles by the various States have not begun yet. We haven't heard the last of this one quite yet.


Don
It is over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:44 PM
 
Location: Aztlan
2,686 posts, read 1,771,432 times
Reputation: 1282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weichert View Post
Nope. Just no point reading about losers.
Yes, you are closed minded. You asked a question, I gave you the sources for the answer, and you dismissed it because you had already made up your mind. That is the definition of closed minded. You can't handle anything that challenges your preconceived view of the universe. And in no way can you say that you understand Obergefell v Hodges unless you read all opinions given in that case. You have disqualified yourself from comment on this topic. Bye.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:44 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.C. Ogilvy View Post
I read the entire decision, Kennedy's majority opinion, and the dissents of Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts. Did you?
Yep, I read the dissent of religious activists posing as Supreme Court justices, who pandered to religious zealots as opposed to being rational and accepting what US Constitution is about: personal freedoms. Especially Scalia came across as ignorant idiot who should be working at Fox News. And Roberts sounded bitter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:46 PM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
 
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945 View Post
I think the gays and lesbians have started dancing in the streets a little prematurely on this one. It may have been the courts decision, but the battles by the various States have not begun yet. We haven't heard the last of this one quite yet.


Don
Perhaps you haven't been following along. The battles by the various states have begun, been fought, and this is the end result. You lost. You may as well get used to losing, since social regressives always lose in the end.

Or did you think SCOTUS took up this case out of nowhere?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:46 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,548 posts, read 37,145,710 times
Reputation: 14001
How gay marriage has worked out in other countries.... http://www.buzzfeed.com/awesomer/wha...gp#.emqpGwBNAL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,949 posts, read 17,870,209 times
Reputation: 10371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
Loving v. Virginia lists marriage as a specific right, for Chrissake.
No they don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
I quoted the finding.
No you didn't

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
They use the word "right". Several times, in fact. Sorry, it's not even debatable.
yes it is.
Again you wrong. Again it isn't about a right. It's about equal protection. Take the thought process to the next level for once. Again marriage isn't a right.

The court ruled that Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute violated both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Justice Warren - Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyMack View Post
MOST with vehement anti same-sex marriage is due to a person's OWN sexual insecurities, there is no other answer that fits.
Yep. It is either their personal insecurities (many truly believe being gay is a choice, a cross road they themselves experienced) or that their own ways are to be a benchmark for everybody else to be free.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:48 PM
 
Location: Aztlan
2,686 posts, read 1,771,432 times
Reputation: 1282
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Yep, I read the dissent of religious activists posing as Supreme Court justices, who pandered to religious zealots as opposed to being rational and accepting what US Constitution is about: personal freedoms. Especially Scalia came across as ignorant idiot who should be working at Fox News. And Roberts sounded bitter.
Your hyperbole aside, at least you are more open minded and better informed than Weichert.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:49 PM
 
Location: Chesapeake Bay
6,046 posts, read 4,818,446 times
Reputation: 3544
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.C. Ogilvy View Post
Yes, you are closed minded. You asked a question, I gave you the sources for the answer, and you dismissed it because you had already made up your mind. That is the definition of closed minded. You can't handle anything that challenges your preconceived view of the universe. And in no way can you say that you understand Obergefell v Hodges unless you read all opinions given in that case. You have disqualified yourself from comment on this topic. Bye.
Nope, I'm not close minded.

The SC has made the decision, not me. I'm being realistic.

And thats that. Like it or not, its a done deal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2015, 09:49 PM
 
34,062 posts, read 17,081,326 times
Reputation: 17213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weichert View Post
Nope, I'm not close minded.

The SC has made the decision, not me. I'm being realistic.

And thats that. Like it or not, its a done deal.
They are our Highest Court.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:11 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top