Utah Legalises Same-Sex Marriage One Day After NM.

I can see some heads exploding after this one:

http://www.advocate.com/politics/ma...0/breaking-utah-marriage-ban-unconstitutional

"Applying the law as it is required to do, the court holds that Utah’s prohibition on same- sex marriage conflicts with the United States Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection and due process under the law," reads the decision. "The State’s current laws deny its gay and lesbian citizens their fundamental right to marry and, in so doing, demean the dignity of these same-sex couples for no rational reason. Accordingly, the court finds that these laws are unconstitutional."

 

It is possible that this case could change everything.

 

The Obama-Nation economy is hurting everyone, divorce lawyers included.

Utah divorce lawyers need new clients just as much as New Mexico divorce lawyers.

Why is this hard to understand?

-

 

No. A court imposed it. They invented a right.

The People of Utah didn't have a hand in this.

 

Exactly! There is no "right" to marry. Try marrying your mom or sister or two or more women at once if you don't believe it.
With liberal judges making law I'm shocked every state hasn't adopted gay marriage.

 

AHAHAHA omg CHRISTmas came early!!!

I bet the LDS is melting down as we speak after this ruling.

Good on them!!

 

Let's looks at the definition of a right, shall we?

Dictionary.com

How is marriage not a right?

 

SO much for the Will of the People.....

 

Oh no women can vote! So much for the will of the people.

Oh no blacks can vote! So much for the will of the people.

Oh no blacks can go to the same schools! So much for the will of the people.

The will of the people means nothing when considering the equal protection of all under the law.

 

The same way driving is not a right. It's not enumerated in the Constitution. By contrast, the right to bear arms...is. Understand yet?

 

Anything that offers legal benefits can be considered a right. For example you couldn't ban homosexuals from driving, now could you? That would violate equal protection under the law.

 

There is no mention of marriage in the Constitution. If the American people decide tomorrow to ban all marriage are you suggesting that the SCOTUS would rule against them?

 

Banning marriage for all people wouldn't be excluding anyone would it? So that would be providing equal protection under the law


Also, the text of the fifth amendment doesn't say that equal protection only covers what someone considers a right

I really don't see how anyone could argue this.

 

I guess you haven't heard?

The US economy hasn't been this good in a very long time. . .

Fail again!

 

So. . .what are you saying?

That married people have been disregarding the Constitution all along?

How desperate bigots have become to stop the inevitable!

What IS in the Constitution is EQUAL RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW. . .and that means that if SOME couples can marry, NO ONE can take that right away from any other couples.

 

If marriage were a right then the American people couldn't ban it. Because it is not a right, they could.

There is no right to marriage in the Constitution. You know it and I know it. Unless you can point to where it is in the Constitution, you are simply pushing your interpretation of certain Amendments to build a case for it being an enumerated right.

It is not. The Supreme Court has never ruled it a right. The Congress has never altered the text of the Constitution to make it a right. The SCOTUS has ruled on occasion, that if jurisdictions are going to allow marriage [Loving vs Virginia], then they cannot set up limitations to marriage. The Congress has passed legislation that makes and propagates marriage as a desirable course of action. Think tax benefits, spousal survival, etc.

None of this make marriage a right.

 

Great news! That makes 17 States AND the District of Columbia!

Evolution is coming fast, now! Equal rights for all.

 

Nope. Please show me where marriage, or driving for that matter, is a right?

Please don't banty the bigot word around. You are clueless on it's use. Your disagreeing with anyone else, their opinions or beliefs make you as much a bigot as anyone else. It's not the shock libbie word you think it is.

You also don't need to CAP either. There is no right to marriage. However, if the legal jurisdictions of the United States allow marriage, then it is open to all equally.

I'll wait for you to show me where in the Constitution marriage is enumerated as a right, however.

 

Correct. . .I am PROUD Of being a bigot against bigotry of all kind.

And, does marriage come under a LAW in the United States? The answer is YES.

Since it comes under the law of the United States, it must obviously fall under "EQUAL RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW."

So, if some couples can benefit from the LEGALITY of being married, EVERY COUPLE has the RIGHT TO THAT SAME BENEFIT UNDER THE LAW.

If you don't like this. . .maybe you should start a movement to convince EVERYONE that marriage (ALL MARRIAGES) is unconstitutional and should be made ILLEGAL FOR ALL!.

That might do it!

 

So you didn't find it. Thank you. I win.

 

That doesn't address what I said about the 5th amendment. The equal protection clause says nothin about rights, so in the end it doesn't matter how you define a right.

 

Then polygamists have ever right in the world to marry two or more women at a time. Why does it remain illegal?

 

Nope. . .YOU LOSE, and you will continue to lose every time a new State declares the legality of gay marriage.

Sorry! Dinosaurs are doomed to extinction!

 

I will gladly support gay marriage when someone logically explains to me why gay marriage should be legal but siblings getting married should not. If marriage is a right, then incestuous unions should be legal. So should polygamous. But if marriage is a contract geared towards the betterment of society, then society should have a say on defining that institution.

 

Sorry but it does. I made one statement: Marriage is not a Constitutional right. You felt the need to be confrontational about it being a right. Unless you can find it in the Constitution, then I am correct.

- - - Updated - - -

Please show me where I argued against any form of marriage. You can't, because I haven't. I merely stated that Marriage is not a Constitutional right.

Enjoy your FAIL.