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.
Principle 6 - All mankind were created equal. The Founders knew that in these three ways, all mankind are theoretically treated as: 1. Equal before God. 2. Equal before the law. 3. Equal in their rights.
Principle 6 - All mankind were created equal. The Founders knew that in these three ways, all mankind are theoretically treated as: 1. Equal before God. 2. Equal before the law. 3. Equal in their rights.
From your list.
exactly my point.
self defense is also a right and needed to have freedom.
both the states and the feds make laws against that fundamental right, and make no qualms about it whatsoever.
just like a liberal when they are losing the arguement. start accusing people that they have no idea of what they are talking about, or to start calling them names.
with you it is the former instead of the latter.
this argument is over as you just lost.
The fact that SSM is becoming law, proves that it is you who have lost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching
exactly my point.
self defense is also a right and needed to have freedom.
both the states and the feds make laws against that fundamental right, and make no qualms about it whatsoever.
What does self-defense have to do with allowing SSM? Seems like you're derailing the topic, as you have no effective argument.
To not be discriminated against because you happen to be homosexual is a human right.
From a purely Constitutional focus, SCOTUS has not yet decided this is so. With the conflicting appeals court decisions, SCOTUS will finally have to take up the issue.
Of note, AG Wilson for South Carolina is appealing this decision quoting the 78% of the electorate being against gay marriage as the rationale. His appeal is likely to fail because he this falls under the 4th Circuit which has previously ruled on the issue. AG Wilson's claim is that SC's law differs enough from the previously decided one.
From a purely Constitutional focus, SCOTUS has not yet decided this is so.
The Supreme Court most certainly has addressed this question on several occasions: Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas, United States v. Windsor.
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.
