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.
The court doesn't have the authority to "realize" that and change existing law. They simply declare if something is Constitutional or not. That's it. The SCOTUS has CLEARLY overstepped its authority on this issue, as it has done before.
They simply ruled that the district court was correct when it ruled that denying a marriage license to two consenting adults simply because they were the same sex violated the "Equal Protection" clause of the 14th Amendment. In other words, they declared if something is Constitutional or not.
I can't imagine making a public statement implying that I understand the Constitution better than people with advanced degrees and decades of experience in Constitutional law. If nothing else, the Justices are, by definition, EXPERTS in understanding the Constitution.
Don't like it? Change the Constitution. But this nonsense about it guaranteeing same sex marriage as a right is purely made up.
True. You made it up because the SCOTUS did no such thing. They simply required that ALL the states honor the status granted by other states. It is an equal protection issue. We can't have some states acknowledging and granting the rights usually accorded to marriage and have them abrogated because someone moves to another state. That way lies chaos.
Last edited by MysticPhD; 02-19-2016 at 03:03 PM..
The court doesn't have the authority to "realize" that and change existing law. They simply declare if something is Constitutional or not. That's it. The SCOTUS has CLEARLY overstepped its authority on this issue, as it has done before.
Yes, Vizio, it does, BY seeing that current application is unconstitutional because of that realization. It is just a new application of the principles in the Constitution and not overstepping in the least even if where it DOES step is on your toes.
Really? The Constitution was written at the time when that was the ONLY form of marriage existing. That's awful short-sighted of the founding fathers, isn't it? Honestly....this argument is just silly. There is no bias against gay people in regards to marriage. I was never asked when I got married if I was gay or straight. It wasn't on the application.
Funny, my wife and I recently got married and they didn't ask us if we were gay or straight either. See, nothing has changed.
True. You made it up because the SCOTUS did no such thing. They simply required that ALL the states honor the status granted by other states. It is an equal protection issue. We can't have some states acknowledging and granting the rights usually accorded to marriage and have them abrogated because someone moves to another state. That way lies chaos.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
The court doesn't have the authority to "realize" that and change existing law. They simply declare if something is Constitutional or not. That's it. The SCOTUS has CLEARLY overstepped its authority on this issue, as it has done before.
They did not legislate, they simply enforced the equal protection clause of the Constitution. As long as there is one state that recognizes SSM, then all must do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
Yes, Vizio, it does, BY seeing that current application is unconstitutional because of that realization. It is just a new application of the principles in the Constitution and not overstepping in the least even if where it DOES step is on your toes.
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.