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.
It is no surprise to see so many people jumping to rationalize their preference for withholding the benefits of lawful marriage to the person one loves, from people they don't like, out of fear or superstition or just plain presumption. Such indefensible presumption is part of the heritage of our nation, practiced by reactionaries of each generation with decreasing success.
But court cases do use case precedence to rule on the cases before them. And all of the recent cases ruling on marriage point to the 14th amendment.
Admittedly, but let's see what SCOTUS says when their feet are on the fire and they have to make a real decision on whether we are a union of states or a federal dictatorship.Let's see how far they will go for the gay cause.
Ah yes, the self-congratulatory smugness of the liberal elite's bigotry is once again on display for all to observe. it was "The Blacks" fault that prop 8 passed, now its the Mormons fault etc etc...
yeah its all them d*mn republicans fault that a "license" is not a right. you know, like that state full of notorious right wing rush lim-bots, california who voted to pass prop 8...
of course a license should not be a "right". there are qualifications and conditions to any license, hence the term "license", and the state should be able to define those terms and conditions where the federal govt can not.
At least in this case, the state will be there to defend the voice of it people. As bad as the gloating is here, it was nothing compared to the people who were celebrating the usurpation of the democratic process in california.
Last edited by CousinMaynard; 12-23-2013 at 06:46 AM..
Admittedly, but let's see what SCOTUS says when their feet are on the fire and they have to make a real decision on whether we are a union of states or a federal dictatorship.Let's see how far they will go for the gay cause.
All you have to do is look at the Loving V Virginia case where the supreme court ruled that all states has to allow interracial marriage based on the 14th amendment. That case was mentioned in every SSM case ruling too.
A federal dictatorship? I find it very interesting that you see a ruling on equality equates to a dictatorial ruling. Also, as a new member I find it quite telling about you.
Welcome, you find there is much, much more to tell...
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.
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.
