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.
Of course it is. That you can't discern the difference is troubling.
Well, if I actually cared about you.
I see that there have been several more pages since this response to me. Anyway, I'm not sure how you do not understand what discrimination is but that is okay. I don't think you are capable. So, feel free to think what you want but please don't react in a violent way. I don't need you to care about me. I honestly don't care. I am just trying to educate you. That's all...
News flash: Gay marriage is here to stay. It's been voted in, and it will not be going away.
In the vast majority of states it has been voted out but unelected federal appointee activist judges have overturned the expressed will of the people. This is not over and the majority of the people will not "get used to it". This is far from over.
In the vast majority of states it has been voted out but unelected federal appointee activist judges have overturned the expressed will of the people. This is not over and the majority of the people will not "get used to it". This is far from over.
Oh no, it's over. There's no way you're going to end up winning this and fighting it is only going to hurt you more in the end.
Oh no, it's over. There's no way you're going to end up winning this and fighting it is only going to hurt you more in the end.
It's not up to me, or you. The Supreme Court has to rule on the 10th Amendment as to whether states can define marriage in their respective state or not. If SCOTUS rules against the clear meaning and intent of the 10th Amendment, the next issue is if some states refuse to comply. Some will. Then what happens?
It's not up to me, or you. The Supreme Court has to rule on the 10th Amendment as to whether states can define marriage in their respective state or not. If SCOTUS rules against the clear meaning and intent of the 10th Amendment, the next issue is if some states refuse to comply. Some will. Then what happens?
If the courts rule against the anti-gay marriage laws (and I suspect they will, and as time marches on and considering the likelihood that the next President will be a Democrat and two GOP-appointed SCOTUS judges will be 80 in 2016, it's only a matter of time) the states will comply with decisions of the courts. It won't be a matter of whether they will or won't, they will.
If the courts rule against the anti-gay marriage laws (and I suspect they will, and as time marches on and considering the likelihood that the next President will be a Democrat and two GOP-appointed SCOTUS judges will be 80 in 2016, it's only a matter of time) the states will comply with decisions of the courts. It won't be a matter of whether they will or won't, they will.
Are you of the opinion that Democraticaly appointed justices don't believe in the US Constitution? The 10th Amendment leaves to the states to decide all matters not specifically covered in the body of the Constitution. Marriage is not covered.
Are you of the opinion that Democraticaly appointed justices don't believe in the US Constitution? The 10th Amendment leaves to the states to decide all matters not specifically covered in the body of the Constitution. Marriage is not covered.
I am of the opinion that courts have already ruled on this using the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and will continue doing so. According to your reasoning, the courts should never have ruled in Loving v. Virginia that Virginia couldn't outlaw interracial marriage, but indeed they did and that was more than 40 years ago.
If you want to argue the meaning of the 10 Amendment, you are free to do so, but I do not interpret it as you do and clearly thus far, most of the courts have ruled that anti-gay marriage laws were in violation of gay people's 14th Amendment rights.
I am of the opinion that courts have already ruled on this using the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and will continue doing so. According to your reasoning, the courts should never have ruled in Loving v. Virginia that Virginia couldn't outlaw interracial marriage, but indeed they did and that was more than 40 years ago.
If you want to argue the meaning of the 10 Amendment, you are free to do so, but I do not interpret it as you do and clearly thus far, most of the courts have ruled that anti-gay marriage laws were in violation of gay people's 14th Amendment rights.
How you or I interpret it is not so important. It's how SCOTUS interprets it. Does the 14th trump the 10th? We shall see.
How you or I interpret it is not so important. It's how SCOTUS interprets it. Does the 14th trump the 10th? We shall see.
That's true, but ruling against gay marriage based upon the 10th Amendment would essentially also undo Loving v. Virginia and besides the fact that the court is generally loathe to go against precedent, they probably don't want to open the pandora's box of making it legal for states to outlaw interracial marriage again, so an educated guess is that they'll let the federal court rulings striking down anti-gay marriage laws stand and simply refuse to hear the cases at least for the time being. But the court has already faced this argument in the Loving v. Virginia and the 14th Amendment won.
That's true, but ruling against gay marriage based upon the 10th Amendment would essentially also undo Loving v. Virginia and besides the fact that the court is generally loathe to go against precedent, they probably don't want to open the pandora's box of making it legal for states to outlaw interracial marriage again, so an educated guess is that they'll let the federal court rulings striking down anti-gay marriage laws stand and simply refuse to hear the cases at least for the time being. But the court has already faced this argument in the Loving v. Virginia and the 14th Amendment won.
There is quite a difference between marriage between different races and marriage between two of the same sex. Still, I would not bet my next paycheck on how this court will decide. It can go either way.
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.
