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.
You forgot 'ignorance'. Anti-gay people can say the stupidest things. Just look at these threads.
Often it's wilful ignorance- which is even worse.
I often put in part of my favorite quote from the 1940's "Ignorance is Bliss" the full quote is " Action Without Purpose is Piffle, Ignorance is Bliss" It is a quote from the Works Progress Administration.
I see you don't understand how our government works. You don't have the right to vote away other people's civil rights. The job of the judiciary is to stop tyranny of the majority. It's ironic you're whining about freedom loving Americans, when you don't seem to care about the freedom of those not in the majority.
Back to the same old tired tactic of trying to paint people like me out as ignorant. May I ask do you understand how our government is supposed to work??? The judiciary is not the legislative branch, it does not have the power to create law like it is trying to do. No ones rights have been violated other than those of the states. Homosexuality is a behavior and it can be regulated through state law, and marriage is regulated by state law. Homosexuals are not a race, religion, or gender, they are a group of people engaged in a behavior deemed to be deviant by a majority of Americans. They are not protected by civil rights laws, this is a huge judicial overstep. We the people have the right to stand up to this. One poster said my post was filled with vitriol, well yes it may be. I despise gay marriage, I despise overbearing federal government and I have no use for those who support it. The path our nation is on disgusts me, Id be ok with secession at this point.
Back to the same old tired tactic of trying to paint people like me out as ignorant. May I ask do you understand how our government is supposed to work??? The judiciary is not the legislative branch, it does not have the power to create law like it is trying to do. No ones rights have been violated other than those of the states. Homosexuality is a behavior and it can be regulated through state law, and marriage is regulated by state law. Homosexuals are not a race, religion, or gender, they are a group of people engaged in a behavior deemed to be deviant by a majority of Americans. They are not protected by civil rights laws, this is a huge judicial overstep. We the people have the right to stand up to this. One poster said my post was filled with vitriol, well yes it may be. I despise gay marriage, I despise overbearing federal government and I have no use for those who support it. The path our nation is on disgusts me, Id be ok with secession at this point.
No one is saying the Judiciary is the legislative branch. However, the Judiciary does have the power to rule if the laws set up by the Legislature are Constitutional. In this case, and many similar cases the Judiciary rules that the laws set up by the states violate the Constitution. That is EXACTLY how the government is suppose to work. Legislature makes the laws, the Judiciary deems if the law is Constitutional.
No one is saying the Judiciary is the legislative branch. However, the Judiciary does have the power to rule if the laws set up by the Legislature are Constitutional. In this case, and many similar cases the Judiciary rules that the laws set up by the states violate the Constitution. That is EXACTLY how the government is suppose to work. Legislature makes the laws, the Judiciary deems if the law is Constitutional.
In your opinion those state laws violate the constitution. In my opinion its judicial activism. Liberals have gotten most of their most cherished accomplishments through judicial activism. Abortion rights is the most famous of these, along with affirmative action, bussing etc. Just because this has worked for the liberals in the past does not mean it is right, or that it is how the government is supposed to work. In fact I find it very sad that so many people believe this is ok, but our founding fathers are rolling in their graves over it. The fact that in some parts of America a majority support this kind of judicial activism is proof that our democracy is doomed, the people are loosing the power to have their elected representatives make laws for them, instead a handful of appointed judges hold all the authority.
In your opinion those state laws violate the constitution. In my opinion its judicial activism. Liberals have gotten most of their most cherished accomplishments through judicial activism. Abortion rights is the most famous of these, along with affirmative action, bussing etc. Just because this has worked for the liberals in the past does not mean it is right, or that it is how the government is supposed to work. In fact I find it very sad that so many people believe this is ok, but our founding fathers are rolling in their graves over it. The fact that in some parts of America a majority support this kind of judicial activism is proof that our democracy is doomed, the people are loosing the power to have their elected representatives make laws for them, instead a handful of appointed judges hold all the authority.
'[J]udicial activism' is nothing but a canard foisted by those who lack the ability to articulate an intelligent, coherent response to a ruling they dislike - or, simply have no substantive basis to argue with such a ruling. In short, 'judicial activism' is just petulant shorthand for "Waaa! I'm unhappy!".
Essentially, Windsor mandates these rulings. In fact, District Courts are unanimous in five cases in agreeing that it does. How amusing that you demand that mere District Courts ignore the stare decisis mandated by rulings of the United States Supreme Court.
Here. Learn a little about the Constitution, from the man who wrote most of it:
Quote:
The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.
Back to the same old tired tactic of trying to paint people like me out as ignorant. May I ask do you understand how our government is supposed to work??? The judiciary is not the legislative branch, it does not have the power to create law like it is trying to do. No ones rights have been violated other than those of the states. Homosexuality is a behavior and it can be regulated through state law, and marriage is regulated by state law. Homosexuals are not a race, religion, or gender, they are a group of people engaged in a behavior deemed to be deviant by a majority of Americans. They are not protected by civil rights laws, this is a huge judicial overstep. We the people have the right to stand up to this. One poster said my post was filled with vitriol, well yes it may be. I despise gay marriage, I despise overbearing federal government and I have no use for those who support it. The path our nation is on disgusts me, Id be ok with secession at this point.
Sorry but you are wrong. Why does it bother you so much that two same sex persons wish to get married?
For those opposed to the ruling, do yourselves a favor, read the ruling and then state why you are still against it.
Though I'm not against the ruling, I'll tell you why I don't like the whole legal framework used to reach the decision.
The SC set up a convoluted system to analyze equal protection cases, giving themselves the sole power to decide if a group is entitled to strict scrutiny, intermediate, heightened, rational review, or whatever other level it comes up with. The judges decide what standards to use and which groups meet which standards. Then a judge decides what is 'rational' or 'credible.' What gives the Michigan or any other judge the ability or authority to render Legal decisions on constitutional issues based on their personal opinions of what's rational or credible ? The answer is, other judges.
Do you even KNOW how many "contracts" a couple would need in order to cover everything automatically covered under their Marriage Contract?
It's utterly impossible. Many of the legal rights of marriage cannot be created via contracts between two people.
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.
