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.
SCOTUS rules on the Constitutionality of laws. That is their job. Declaring SSM bans unconstitutional does not mean you now have to marry another man unless YOU want to. You know that, right?
And if they now wanted to rule that they were solely in charge of making all laws, backed up by a nice long opinion signed by five "justices," how could anyone stop them? Who would try?
This is these people acting well outside of their authority.
The US Constitution has become a joke, thanks in part to these people and also to Barack Obama. It it time for everyone to recognize that the American experiment has run its course as originally imagined and that the US Constitution is not longer respected or adhered to, and is not worth the paper it is written on.
And if they now wanted to rule that they were solely in charge of making all laws, backed up by a nice long opinion signed by five "justices," how could anyone stop them? Who would try?
This is these people acting well outside of their authority.
The US Constitution has become a joke, thanks in part to these people and also to Barack Obama. It it time for everyone to recognize that the American experiment has run its course as originally imagined and that the US Constitution is not longer respected or adhered to, and is not worth the paper it is written on.
Again, SCOTUS rules on the Constitutionality of laws. They do not create law. It is quite telling that you want to throw the Constitution away b/c of ONE ruling that you don't like. Here is some reading on the procedure of the Court. The Court and Its Procedures - Supreme Court of the United States
Inheritance rules, splitting assets if the relationship ends, making it possible to live with a loved one from a foreign country, medical decisions and visitation rights, that kind of thing?
But - of course you knew that. Coyly feigning ignorance in place of argumentation.
So Alabama is having a fit and throwing their toys out of the pram? Not surprised.
The bill was apparently too weird for Alabama - it had a very short life and is now deceased.
Government has been making rules regarding marriage since freakin' Hammurabi. This newfound insistence on separation is depressingly transparent.
Too true. When have you ever heard Conservatives complaining about the government in marriage before SSM? Never, that's when. Because up until then they had zero problems with state being "in the marriage business."
Yup, cuz thousands of years ago it was common knowledge that two men could make a baby together and raise a family together, it's written in all the old books of religion, back in the day.
So the criterion for a valid marriage is the production of offspring? Logically, then, only unmarried parents should be able to get legally married. In fact, in some tribal societies, that's exactly how its done. Kids first, then legal marriage.
Again, SCOTUS rules on the Constitutionality of laws. They do not create law. It is quite telling that you want to throw the Constitution away b/c of ONE ruling that you don't like. Here is some reading on the procedure of the Court. The Court and Its Procedures - Supreme Court of the United States
They created a new one one here, so that is clearly not true. Deny it if it makes you feel better, but they issued a new definition of marriage not based on a law, but on their own decree.
And meanwhile, they also decided not to enforce the law regarding Obamacare, because they were concerned that a literal reading would be disruptive. So, they effectively enabled the creation of a new law in this instance as well.
Also, Barack Obama is constantly creating new laws or issuing orders to disregard existing laws, by executive fiat.
Keep playing games if that is all you can think to do, but we are now increasingly being ruled by not by the rule of law, but by the rule of man. This is a huge setback for our political system, and a clear indication that the integrity that was always required in order to sustain the Constitutional system that we have enjoyed over the last 200+ years no longer exists in the people who hold the highest offices in the land.
The American experiment clearly appears to have run its course and needs to be revisited in a major, perhaps revolutionary way.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson
I don't know how many patriots there are in America today, but it would not be hard to put together a short list of tyrants.
Our constitution does not give the supreme court the power to decide marriage laws for the states of the entire nation, just because a simple court majority wish it were so.
And it didn't. The decision was based on equal protection - if some adult couples can get legally married, then all adult couples can get legally married.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812
If we want to endorse same sex marriage, we go thru the proper process of amending our state Constitutions and then if we feel we need to, we amend the US Constitution.
You are trampling on your own argument. The US Constitution does not define marriage, nor do any state constitutions, AFAIK. Why then does defining and allowing SSM require any constitutional amendments????
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812
But the liberal progs and democrats think that process is not necessary. All we ever need now is a simple majority ruling from the Supreme Court. Who needs the federal or state level Constitutional amendment process when you have an activist court. It worked so well with Plessy.
We had a process. Lower court rulings, appeals, etc. Many legal arguments. Those arguments finally reached SCOTUS, and they made a ruling, based on several rulings they had already made. The fact that you don't like the result doesn't mean that no process took place - a process which followed a well-established track. Except for the subject at issue, there is nothing remarkable about what happened.
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.
