Alabama forbids same-sex marriage licenses. (work, women, against, history)

[Smash255]

Originally Posted by V8 Vega

Marajuana is federally illegal and many states ignore that so why can't states ignore the Homosexual marrage law?

State laws can differ from federal laws, however state laws can't violate the U.S Constitution.

[Ceist]

Originally Posted by 16 Acres

I'll give you the most important one:

Romans 1:24-27

And if you or anyone else out there do not like my Christianity, I've got nothing else to say about it...

Now if only that had had anything to do with gay and lesbian people. Which it doesn't.


By the way, it's 21st century America now. Not 1st century Corinth.

[hooligan]

Originally Posted by Snowball7

It's not about Christianity, DaneinLA. That's off-topic.
The "gay" marriage movement started in predominantly Christian
countries, not in Iran or China.

It absolutely IS about Christianity in the post that Dane is replying to.

[hooligan]

Originally Posted by max340

The Supreme Court once agreed with people's opinions in Dred Scott v Sandford and Plessy v Ferguson. I don't think appeal to authority is the fallacy, if any, that you want to deploy.

The SCOTUS isn't the ultimate arbiter of a subjective thing like what is the "right" thing to do. They ARE the ultimate arbiter of an objective thing like Constitutionality. Once they rule something is Unconstitutional, it IS, until such time that a future decision by the SCOTUS would reverse it.

[jacqueg]

Originally Posted by brownbagg

it not going against federal law, there a law in the state constitution on this, that law has to be change to be in federal guidelines, the state sentate needs to meet to change that law. till that time, its confusing

Actually, it's not a bit confusing, not even to Moore. He knows what the score is, he's just making a (useless) statement.

All lawbooks contain superseded laws. A lot of times, legislatures don't bother to repeal them. That's because spending time and money on a dead issue doesn't seem sensible.

[Smash255]

Originally Posted by jacqueg

Actually, it's not a bit confusing, not even to Moore. He knows what the score is, he's just making a (useless) statement.

All lawbooks contain superseded laws. A lot of times, legislatures don't bother to repeal them. That's because spending time and money on a dead issue doesn't seem sensible.

Exactly, Alabama for example still the law banning interracial marriage on the books for over 30 years following the Loving V Virginia ruling which ruled the ban violated the U.S Constitution.

[tinytrump]

Originally Posted by Smash255

Exactly, Alabama for example still the law banning interracial marriage on the books for over 30 years following the Loving V Virginia ruling which ruled the ban violated the U.S Constitution.

still?? the congress there does not work much -either---

[~HecateWhisperCat~]

Originally Posted by Snowball7

I wouldn't be surprised if Oberfell vs. Hodges is overturned.
Ginsburg and Kagan violated the rules and their opinions
could be stricken.
AFA.net - Ginsburg and Kagan Must Recuse Themselves On Gay Marriage Case

Don't hold your breath.

[rleroy]

Originally Posted by 16 Acres

I'll give you the most important one:

Romans 1:24-27

And if you or anyone else out there do not like my Christianity, I've got nothing else to say about it...

So you want to force people into your idea of a Christian Sharia law?

Are you saying homosexuals can't be Christian?

What about the separation of church and state?

Do you care to defend your opinion or would you just like to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore logic and facts and federal law.

[Smash255]

Originally Posted by tinytrump

still?? the congress there does not work much -either---

Remained on the books until 2000 whem it was placed on the ballot to be removed. 40% of voters, voted to keep the ban on the books.