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.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by LovelyinLa
It's this attitude that is most unhelpful and offensive. Why do are the people who disagree with you ignorant? Are you an all knowing God? Or are you just another person with an opinion? Are you saying that anyone with different cultural values are all ignorant because they differ from yours? If so, that would be pretty ignorant of you? How can you demand respect for your opinion/position when you clearly disrespect anyone who doesn't agree with you.
BTW, you don't need much education to understand "only a marriage between a man and woman is valid". So instead of calling us uneduated, just say we disagree. Again, the name calling is not necessary and a sign of ignorance.
So you believe that judges should be able to rule on matters without being accountable to the public? The US isn't a monarchy and this is what we are becoming when unaccountable judges enact laws. The judges are supposed to rule on an issue and give it to the legislators to enact laws. This is why we have the checks and balances. To protect ourselves from tyranny from the bench.
Monarchy?! Hardly. Judges are appointed by the governor (or President).
Should we be able to recall U.S. Supreme Court judges too?
Tyranny from the bench?! LOL...
If someone doesn't like the ruling of a judge, they have a right to appeal. It works quite well that way.
It's this attitude that is most unhelpful and offensive. Why do are the people who disagree with you ignorant? Are you an all knowing God? Or are you just another person with an opinion? Are you saying that anyone with different cultural values are all ignorant because they differ from yours? If so, that would be pretty ignorant of you? How can you demand respect for your opinion/position when you clearly disrespect anyone who doesn't agree with you.
BTW, you don't need much education to understand "only a marriage between a man and woman is valid". So instead of calling us uneduated, just say we disagree. Again, the name calling is not necessary and a sign of ignorance.
Yes, true. BUT marriage has ALWAYS been a union between a man and woman. The essential definition has never changed.
Except when it's been between several men and one woman. I guess that's part of your essential definition too.
And the truth is that marriage already is legal between two people of the same sex in several countries and two U.S. states. The number in which it's legal is not going to decrease; it's going to increase, undoubtedly.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
Monarchy?! Hardly. Judges are appointed by the governor (or President).
Should we be able to recall U.S. Supreme Court judges too?
Tyranny from the bench?! LOL...
If someone doesn't like the ruling of a judge, they have a right to appeal. It works quite well that way.
Yes, we should be able to recall a US Supreme Court Justice as well. Average Joes and Marys cannot afford attorneys to appeal a Supreme Court decision.
Trying to steal our thousands of years old moral and social traditions of marriage is a most cruel discrimination to most Americans, that is the way it is.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
Except when it's been between several men and one woman. I guess that's part of your essential definition too.
And the truth is that marriage already is legal between two people of the same sex in several countries and two U.S. states. The number in which it's legal is not going to decrease; it's going to increase, undoubtedly.
No, I do not support polygamy either. The fact that unaccountable state supreme court justices have ruled gay marriage legal in Mass and Conn does not mean that it is valid.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
Well, thankfully, that's not possible, and hopefully, it never will be.
Just wait until the make-up of the Supreme Court becomes conservative then you'd be crying for recall.
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.
