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.
Actually, I think Dr. King would be on OUR side. Even if the Supreme Court ruled in the Gaystapo's favor, he'd say about the Colorado law "An unjust law is no law at all!"
I doubt it. King loved the CRA of 1965 which really started the war on the right of association.
Actually, I think Dr. King would be on OUR side. Even if the Supreme Court ruled in the Gaystapo's favor, he'd say about the Colorado law "An unjust law is no law at all!"
And yet he fought to get rid of discrimination. Are you saying that the man that fought to end discrimination would applaud discrimination?
LOL! Obummer and the Lefties in California blatantly ignored DOMA and Prop 8 despite them being law and eventually it was taken to courts where their robed tyrant pals struck down the laws they didn't like.
Also, the Left sure doesn't take that policy with "sanctuary cities".
It's time we stopped following the Left's iron-fisted laws and flip the bird to them and their "do as I say, not as I do" rule over us!
DOMA was still in force until the supreme court ruled it unconstitutional. The case that ended it was brought up because a woman was required to pay estate taxes on her deceased wifes estate since DOMA made their legal marriage not recognized federally.
As for PROP 8 it also went to court because people could not get married legally. The court ruled prop 8 unconstitutional.
Yes, because the baker's First Amendment Rights were violated. The DOJ does in fact have the responsibility to uphold the US Constitution.
"Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself"
Unless it is discrimination.
We have anti discrimination laws prohibiting discriminating based on race, religion, gender and sexual orientation.
On a federal level, no we do not. There are no federal protections for LGBT. And due to the Constitution's Supremacy clause, either the Constitution or federal law supercedes any state law to the contrary, such as in this case in which the baker's First Amendment Rights were violated.
This provides more info, and includes a US map:
Quote:
"With limited or no federal protections, an LGBT person can get legally married in most states, but then be evicted from an apartment and denied a home loan."
Trump is stocking up on conservative ultra right judges. Gay rights will be the next thing to go. Wonder how many gays voted for Trump and how they feel about it now?
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.
