Gay marriage looms as 'battle of our times'

This is a fading issue. It is being replaced by another scape goat immigration. It is simply one of a number of straw men that are put forward to distract the country from serious issue such a National Debt, War in Iraq, internal spying, and censorship. It is one of the levers the right of the GOP is pulling attempting to manipulate the voters who are on the whole in a very foul mood.

0 Replies

Acquiunk wrote:

This is a fading issue. It is being replaced by another scape goat immigration.

"Scape goat" issue????? So I take it you're for open borders and homosexual "marriage".

0 Replies

TheSarge wrote:

No, conservatives are merely responding to activist liberal judges who think their above hundreds of thousands of voters.

Specifically, they think that the authors of referendum questions are not above the law. In particular they think that when the constitution has a one-question rule, you can't have one referendum on two questions. Please explain to me how this makes them activist liberal judges.

0 Replies

(Offers Thomas some chips or mixed nuts while we wait)

Or, any other court ruling that indicates an activist judge is trying to force gay marriage on the nation.

Any court case will do if it shows what you claim.

0 Replies

TheSarge wrote:

"Scape goat" issue????? So I take it you're for open borders and homosexual "marriage".

And I take it you're not.

This is typical of the level to which this debate has sunk. Personally I don't care who marries whom. As for the borders, both north and south, they have traditionally been open but regulated and I see no reason why that policy can not be continued. The cause for the current border problem is the propensity of many American businesses to employ cheap illegal labor at the expense of more expensive American labor. This is the "Wal-mart philosophy" ie. cheap as possible and damn the consequences. This is where the control effort should be focused. But many of those employers are Republican.

0 Replies

squinney wrote:

(Offers Thomas some chips or mixed nuts while we wait)

Thanks, but I think we should order Pizza. It may be a long wait.

0 Replies

A Gay "Marriage" Judge did it here in Maryland

0 Replies

TheSarge wrote:

blueveinedthrobber wrote:
TheSarge wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"My opinion is that people who are so frightened of gay marriage that they think it's going to have some influence on heterosexual marriage must have the most tenous and slippery grip on their own heterosexuality..... "

ohh yeah, that's it That's a common, albeit stupid, analogy used by the gay "marriage" crowd. If anything, it's the people floating the extremist concept that have the homosexual tendencies.

what extremist concept might that be? That we have better things to do than worry about who's dick is being stuck where or who's performing oral on who?

Would you rather have Congress focus the brunt of their energies on the immigration problem or queers?
The war on terror or queers?
Security at our ports and borders or queers?
The preservation of our Constitution or queers?
The preservation of Social Security for those who've paid into it or queers?

I could go on but
A. I would bet that with you it's a rhetorical question
B. I don't want to appear too extreme. :wink:

Like most Americans, I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. You need both to make "it" work. Unforunately for the gay "marriage" crowd, the human race isn't unisex.

Ask MOST Americans who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman if they are as upset as you seem to be though and if they think this issue should be the focus of the news media and the attention of Congress and our president (?) instead of the other issues I mentioned and see what the response is. It's a QUESTION NOT OF THE ISSUE, BUT OF THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ISSUE WHEN COMPARED TO OTHERS.

0 Replies

The judge basically dodged the issue. She wrote an opinion, stayed it and kicked the whole issue to a higher court. That is how you avoid responsiblity if you are a judge.

0 Replies

TheSarge wrote:

A Gay "Marriage" Judge did it here in Maryland

Possibly true -- the "equal protection" argument for striking down traditional marriage statutes doesn't convince me either. But that wasn't your oritional claim. Your original claim was the problem is " Dangerous black robes overuling 76% of Georgia voters". Are you withdrawing this original claim? Your change of examples seems to suggest it.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

TheSarge wrote:
Your original claim was the problem is " Dangerous black robes overuling 76% of Georgia voters". Are you withdrawing this original claim? Your change of examples seems to suggest it.

No I am not withdrawing it, Mr. Gay "Marriage"

Georgia Link

0 Replies

blueveinedthrobber wrote:

Ask MOST Americans who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman if they are as upset as you seem to be though and if they think this issue should be the focus of the news media

The liberal media supports this concept 100%. No one working for the NY Times, LA Times, CBS, NPR etc.. would dare admit they oppose gay "marriage". Their career's would be on the line.

0 Replies

TheSarge, what do you mean "liberal media"? The media is almost entirely conservative. If you want to read liberal media start with The Nation. And they are not revolutionary, only "progressive." But you take a truley liberal perspective you'll see how conservative the press actually is.

0 Replies

TheSarge wrote:

I'd tend to be less objecting of the gay "marriage" crowd if they didn't use such militant, non-democratic, means to advance their agenda. Dangerous black robes overuling 76% of Georgia voters doesn't bode well. It's happened in other states as well where robes have overuled the people. The judiciary should intrepret law, not make law. As it stands now, judges are overstepping bounds to advance gay "marriage". Likewise, it's harmful when a mayor issues licenses to gay couples knowing he's in violation of the law.

I also wish the crowd would stop indoctrinating school childen. School children shouldn't be taught it's equally normal to be homosexual. In fact, schools should stay out of the debate all together. Unfortunately, school kids are captive audience when forced to read trash like "Heather Has Two Mommies" and "Daddy's Roomate".

Perhaps, if we lived in a pure democracy, your "majority rules" argument would have merit. But we don't.

The United States Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. No state law--not even a state law that is approved by 76 percent of the state voters--may trump or override the supreme law of the land.

If your state passes a state law that deprives YOU of substantive or procedural due process or equal protection under the law in violation of the Fourteen Amendment, you have a right secured by the First Amendment to petition the courts for redress of your grievances.

Your only complaint is that judges are complying with the duty assigned to the judicial branch of government to decide cases and controversies arising under the Constitution. Your desire to be governed by mob rule has no place in our system of government with built-in checks and balances. Accordingly, you ignorantly argue that judges are overstepping bounds. In doing so, it is clear that you have no knowledge how our government is designed to function. You lack basic knowledge concerning the principles upon which this country was founded.

0 Replies

What the left can't seem to grasp

1)The executive branch of government makes sure that the laws of the United States are obeyed

2) The legislative branch is composed of the two bodies of Congress working together to write, debate, and pass bills, which are then passed on to the President for approval

3) The role of the judicial branch is to interpret the nation's laws

These branches are separate, but equal powers. The judiciary can't seem to grasp the concept of equal. By supersiding their assigned purpose, they seek to make themselves more powerful than the constitution mandates.

0 Replies

Dear TheSarge:

LESSON ONE (1) OF THE DAY: The state's power to regulate marriage, even when that power is exercised by majoritarian politics, is LIMITED by the Fourteenth Amendment.

The mob doesn't rule.

While the state court is no doubt correct in asserting that marriage is a social relation subject to the State's police power, Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888), the State does not contend in its argument before this Court that its powers to regulate marriage are unlimited notwithstanding the commands of the Fourteenth Amendment. Nor could it do so in light of Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923), and Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942).

Source: LOVING v. VIRGINIA, 388 U.S. 1 (1967).

See Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

LESSON TWO (2) OF THE DAY: The "black robes" are bound by the Fourteenth Amendment and cannot give legal effect to any state law that contravenes the Fourteenth Amendment.

See Article VI of the Constitution:

"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

0 Replies

TheSarge wrote:

What the left can't seem to grasp

1)The executive branch of government makes sure that the laws of the United States are obeyed

2) The legislative branch is composed of the two bodies of Congress working together to write, debate, and pass bills, which are then passed on to the President for approval

3) The role of the judicial branch is to interpret the nation's laws

These branches are separate, but equal powers. The judiciary can't seem to grasp the concept of equal. By supersiding their assigned purpose, they seek to make themselves more powerful than the constitution mandates.

What YOU can't seem to grasp is that when the judicial branch interprets a state law and finds it to be in conflict with the supreme law of the land, then the state law is unconsitutional--it is void ab initio--it has no legal force or effect whatsoever.

0 Replies

TheSarge wrote:

blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Ask MOST Americans who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman if they are as upset as you seem to be though and if they think this issue should be the focus of the news media

The liberal media supports this concept 100%. No one working for the NY Times, LA Times, CBS, NPR etc.. would dare admit they oppose gay "marriage". Their career's would be on the line.

I see you cut my post off in mid paragraph so you could respond only to the media part and then make an ignorant statement about 100% of the medias employees that is impossible to refute because it's impossible to research. And damn sure impossible for you to know.

Tinfoil hat alert!!!!!!!!!!!

New rightwingnut on board!!!!!
Laughing

0 Replies

TheSarge wrote:

No I am not withdrawing it, Mr. Gay "Marriage"

Georgia Link

And why not? (1) Do you disagree that the Georgia constitution has a single-subject rule for referenda? (2) Do you disagree that some voters want the state to recognize civil unions, but not marriages for gay couples? (3) Do you disagree that the amendment would have denied both? If your answer to #1, #2, and #3 is "no" -- which is what I would answer -- it follows that the drafters submitted an unconstitutional amendment, and that it was the court's job to strike it down.

0 Replies

I suppose, those questions expect some intellectual (and) reading capacities, Thomas ...

What's up with the pizza, you said?

0 Replies

Gay marriage looms as 'battle of our times'

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know