Kagan's Hearing: “There Is No Federal Constitutional Right to Same-Sex Marriage”

Discussion in 'Gay & Lesbian Rights' started by MolonLabe2009, Jul 1, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    78,717
    Likes Received:
    19,868
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You can't answer how marriage is only for procreation or sex.
    You instead have to attack people who tell you it's not or ask you how you come to such a conclusion.
     
  2. Daggdag

    Daggdag Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    15,668
    Likes Received:
    1,957
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have no issues with incest marriage in and of itself, if all involvedy are consenting adults, but they should not be allowed to procreate.
     
  3. smb

    smb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What he said was homosexual acts cannot be treated any differently than heterosexual acts. Ergo there is no difference between a heterosexual relationship and a homosexual one other than gender. You cannot discriminate by gender and because there is no difference in the relationship your notion about it being different is moot. I have reviewed the facts. It is you, because you have an emotional response against same-sex marriage, that cannot see the facts.
     
  4. carpe diem

    carpe diem New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2015
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :blahblah:
     
  5. carpe diem

    carpe diem New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2015
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We see the facts. You are the one choosing to celebrate as our Constitutional Republic is being destroyed. The people voted and it was overturned. In doing so they did not interpret the law, they instead misused what they could to arrive at the decision they desired. That undermines this nation and sets us up for much worse down the road.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Of course you have no problem with it...after all it's just another perversion.
     
  6. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    78,717
    Likes Received:
    19,868
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That sums up your position perfectly.
     
  7. smb

    smb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What undermines our Constitutional Republic is people purposefully trying to undermine the rule of law simply because they don't like it.
     
  8. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, the 30 state Constituions were the rule of law and they were all undermined by the US Supreme Court.
     
  9. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, there is that GLARING diffence in that heterosexual acts are responsible for the perpetuation of the Human species while homosexual sex is responsible for most of the new HIV cases in the US and little else.
     
  10. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because the states violated the U.S. Constitution.
     
  11. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Using a tortured interpretation of the Constitutions "liberty" to include the tax breaks and governmental entitlements of marriage. While the liberty to not be enslaved required a Constitutional amendment.
     
  12. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "All persons" and "equal protection" isn't a tortured interpretation. It's in plain English in the amendment.
     
  13. Gorn Captain

    Gorn Captain Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    35,580
    Likes Received:
    237
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The anti-SSM folks will claim that gay people aren't "persons" and that "equal protection" means a gay man or woman can marry somebody of the opposite gender "equally as anybody else".

    Thing is....if they're still fighting this a year from now....it's not about the "Constitutionality" or "procreation" or whatever....

    it's because they personally hate gays. I can PM you who are the few examples of that locally.
     
  14. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That would be a good argument for the view that treating the married and unmarried differently is unconstitutional. The unmarried are "persons" as well.

    - - - Updated - - -

    No, I'd point out that the unmarried are "persons" as well.
     
  15. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then take it to court.
     
  16. smb

    smb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    As is right by the 14th Amendment.
     
  17. smb

    smb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    And heterosexual acts are responsible for the massive Chlamydia outbreak (1.5M/year versus 55,000/year for Aids). So I guess by your standards heterosexual sex is much more virulent than homosexual sex.
     
  18. Gorn Captain

    Gorn Captain Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    35,580
    Likes Received:
    237
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'd point out...you LOST 2 weeks ago. And you have no more hope of "eventual victory" than the South did after Appomattox Courthouse.

    How long you keep fighting a war that's already over, will now say more about you than the "issue".
     
  19. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually men who have sex with men have a higher prevalence of Chlamydia than men who do not have sex with men. AND heterosexual sex is still responsible for the perpetuation of the species. So not really sure of your point.
     
  20. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I will always disagree with Supreme Court Decisions I believe are wrong.
     
  21. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This supreme courts interpretation of it, that can find any meaning it needs to reach the decision they prefer. And 20 years from now when some closely related couple successfully sues all the way to the suprreme court to establish their right to marriage, we will know I was right all along.
     
  22. smb

    smb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Disagree with them all you want. There are ones that I disagree with also but I do not and would not try to pretend the ruling isn't valid. There is legal recourse. Instead of trying to invalidate the SCOTUS ruling work to get a Constitutional Amendment.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Oh OK. Seems rather asinine to me that you would be rooting for an incestuous marriage to prove a political point but hey thats just me.
     
  23. /dev/null

    /dev/null Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    683
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    30 state constitutions were in violation of the US Constitution, undermining the rule. Now they are all compliant with the US Constitution. Looks like a win for freedom and equality.
     
  24. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There isn't any other way to interpret "all persons"'or "equal protection".

    Right about what?
     
  25. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "All persons" would include the unmarried. Absurd to talk of equal protection when we are talking about an entire body of law that treats the unmarried, UNEQUAL to the married by design.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page