I challenge anyone to argue that SCOTUS will establish gay marriage as a right

Discussion in 'Debates & Contests' started by Troianii, May 20, 2014.

  1. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I can't say that I relate to any of this. So you would scrap the institution of marriage as we know it to avoid the issue of same sex marriage? Sink the ship to drown the rats?Orwellian social engineering? Perhaps it is social engineering but I don't know about Orwellian. What is the alternative? Social Darwinism. Survival of the fittest? I don't think that gay people would do very well. What about when government intervenes in other areas where there's discrimination like racial? I guess that would also be a no.

    Was it you who said elsewhere that the whole debate on same sex marriage was a distraction and a waist of time that we should be spending on other things? You're entitled to believe whatever you want but there are a lot of gay folks who don't think so. There are a lot of straight folks who don't think so either. Yes it can be a distraction, but why? It's because of the hysterical opposition to marriage equality. So we penalize those who are fighting for their rights?

    I'm in NJ . Same sex marriage is legal here now. The issue was a distraction before that happened. Now it is not. It is not even an issue. It's just the way it is. The same is true of the other states where it's legal. If you're concerned about it being a distraction, lets just get it done. I think that we have enough brain power and time to work on this as well as other important issues

    I'm really puzzled as to what you're really all about, especially since you describe yourself as a liberal. I have a vague feeling that I'm missing something but I cant put my finger on it
     
  2. smevins

    smevins New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2013
    Messages:
    6,539
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes it is a distraction and a waste of time, but even beyond that there is nothing equal about marriage. There can be multiple reasons to opose something. If people want to jump a broom and call themselves married and jump it backwards and call themselves divorced, more power to them. The government should not be in the marriage business at all, not because gays might get married, but because the government needs to stop micromanaging people's lives and doling out special access to special people. A widow or a woman who divorced her husband who beat her should not be denied that which she had when her husband was alive or not beating her. It is the firelane mentality. Grocery stores and big box retailers almost have a firelane in front of them even though they are at low risk to catch on fire, and the dozen little restaurants around them whose kitchens might have flames shooting 10 feet high do not. It has nothing to do with the risk of fire--it is about keeping people from parking in front of some stores as not to deter shopping while allowing them to crowd in front of other stores. There is no constancy to the arguments on equality, equal protection, marriage, or fire lanes.
     
  3. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this because there is zero chance of it happening and I fail to see why anyone would want it to happen. You are advocating for government to no longer recognize marriage which would essentially destroy the institution of marriage unless we're talking about religious marriage. In turn we would be weakening if not destroying the family. Marriage is what an important piece of what gives people an incentive to marry and what bonds them together. Those bonds due break but that is not a reason to toss the baby out with the bath water.

    I posted this a while back. This might be a good time to do so again:

     
  4. smevins

    smevins New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2013
    Messages:
    6,539
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The thing that destroys marriage is discord, usually over money. Regardless, there are 8 principle reasons I oppose gay marriage and gay rights, and since nobody in this thread is debating anything, there is no point discussing it because this is supposed to be the debate forum.
     
  5. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I would sure be interested in seeing those reasons spelled out one by one
     
  6. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Justices Ginsberg has even been quoted as saying the High Court has side stepped the gay marriage issue, because they don't want another contentious cultural debate like Roe V. Wade on their hands.
     
  7. smevins

    smevins New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2013
    Messages:
    6,539
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ginsberg is an incrementalist even on causes she strongly supports.
     
  8. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't think that it will drag out the way that Roe v. Wade has. The evidence: In states where same sex marriage has become legal, it is a settled issue, no matter how contentious it had been . It is the new normal. People have realized that the sky is not falling. They see no difference in daily life. They can't claim that human beings are dying as a result of gay marriage. Life just goes on and it's a non issue.
     
  9. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    The SCOTUS most certainly does create constitutional law. What is the difference between a constitutional precedent and constitutional law? There is no difference:

    There is nothing that says that SCOTUS does not create constitutional law
     
  10. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It really is a disgrace that there are people with the temerity to call themselves patriots even as they make such thunderously idiotic pronouncements, evidently in all seriousness.

    So you're of the opinion that SCOTUS creates state and federal constitutions. Have I got that about right?

    No doubt it could appear that way to ESL posters.

    There are of course other possibilities, but Rule 2 prohibits me from enumerating them.
     
  11. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree that the sky won't fall on our heads if gays get married, and it is becoming a new norm. But the court is side stepping this issue, and I think it's a wise decision.
     
  12. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Federal courts have already invalidated state constitutional amendments prohibiting same sex marriage and SCOTUS will soon uphold those rulings. SCOTUS has ruled that DOMA was unconstitutional and often rules on the constitutionality of federal laws. They are not " creating constitution" and I didn't say that they do but they certainly rule on the constitutionality of laws. What part of that do you not get?
     
  13. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Irrelevant.

    You said they create constitutional law, which your own link defines as federal and state constitutions; so in fact that IS what you said.

    I get that you don't know what the hell you're talking about. What more do I need to get?
     
  14. jdog

    jdog Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2014
    Messages:
    4,532
    Likes Received:
    716
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The real focus of this issue should be that no government entity be it Federal, State, or Local has ever been given any jurisdiction whatsoever in the issue of human relationships. Governments only have powers which have been specifically given to them via a contract known as Constitutions. Like any other contract, Constitutions are ruled by the very strict limits of what is specifically stated in the contract.

    Show me one Constitution Federal or State which specifically surrenders the natural right of people to enjoy personal relationships as they see fit to any government entity. You will not be able to find one because the natural right to enjoy personal relationships in any form you see fit is and inalienable right and cannot even be taken by any Constitutional agreement or amendment.

    This is the kind of reasoning that neither the left or the right, seem to understand, only Libertarians recognize this logic.
     
  15. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    You might have a point if all that we are talking about is "human relations" However, we are also talking about a legal arrangement sanctioned by government, with all of the benefits go with it, that is available to one group but not to another group. Furthermore, that distinction is arbitrary with no compelling government interest to justify it.

    You might be one of those folks who thinks that government should have no role in marriage but that would be another conversation. The fact is that government and marriage are so inextricably intertwined that it is not going to change. Lets deal with the reality that we are facing now.
     
  16. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    No doubt that SCOTUS will take NOTICE
     
  17. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    4th Circut Rules Against Va. Same Sex Marriage Ban



    Virginia is back in the news folks....moving right along!



    One more step closed to SCOTUS!

    :woot::woot::woot:
     
  18. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    11,445
    Likes Received:
    3,263
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As a third appellate court has now ruled in favor of same sex marriage being a Constitutional right, in addition to 15 or 16 district courts (with out a single decision the other way), very soon they will have no choice but to take one or more of the lower court cases. And given that it's 20-0 (more or less), they're going to have a very hard time overturning all that precedent, even if it does make Scalia's head explode.
     
  19. SavageNation

    SavageNation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2014
    Messages:
    238
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Lots of interesting discussion in this thread, but at the end of the day, doesn't what's going to happen simply come down to the opinion at the current point in time of whatever court is reviewing it, which may or may not be based on what the Constitution says (as shown in multiple cases presented in Mark Levin's book "The Men in Black")? In other words, it doesn't really matter what any of us think, which is why Thomas Jefferson is so often quoted regarding Judicial tyranny. Judges are accountable to no-one and do not answer to the people.

    Legalizing gay marriage has potential global implications because Muslim Imams will use it as another tool to show other Muslims how immoral America is and promote more hate toward us. Homosexuality is immoral and punishable by death under Islamic (Sharia) law and the majority of Muslims want to be ruled by Sharia law as shown in Pew Research studies.
     
  20. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Those who hate us are going to hate us. All else considered, how much more will they hate us if we implement same sex marriage nationwide. You wouldn't be suggesting that is a good reason to deny equality to gays folks, would you?
    I'm more concerned about the Christion right wing nut that are right here and in our government now.
     
  21. Smartmouthwoman

    Smartmouthwoman Bless your heart Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    55,907
    Likes Received:
    24,863
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Very true. Throughout history homosexuality has been accepted, rejected, normalized, criminalized and it's supporters lauded or stoned. There will never be a permanent resolution for homosexuals because there will always be certain groups waiting in the wings for their turn to define 'normal' in our society.

    Gays should enjoy their popularity while it lasts.
     
  22. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    So you think that all of this will somehow be undone? Gays forced back in the closet? Sounds like the backlash fantasy of someone can't accept what's happening. Not my problem.
     
  23. Smartmouthwoman

    Smartmouthwoman Bless your heart Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    55,907
    Likes Received:
    24,863
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    A lot of things have the potential to stop America's slobbery romance with gays... the election of a closet homophobe to the WH, appointing anti - gay SC judges, an unexpected surge in new AIDS cases.

    Americans are fickle... what's in today can be grossly unpopular tomorrow. If gays didn't insist on pushing their agenda in everybody's face, the chances of keeping the status quo would probably be a lot better. As it is, only a matter of time til folks get sick of hearing gays constant complaints.
     
  24. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Still dreaming and fantasizing about a world that no longer exists. You'll get over it , or not. Doesn't matter much anymore. As far as the gays pushing an agenda in anyone's face goes, it seems to be what's needed as long as there are people like you still around. If you want to talk about who is sick of what, we can talk about gays and their advocates being sick of your whining.
     
  25. Smartmouthwoman

    Smartmouthwoman Bless your heart Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    55,907
    Likes Received:
    24,863
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I have no dog in this fight... say anything you like...I don't pretend to speak for anybody but myself.

    Unlike some here.
     

Share This Page