|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,062
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 2 minutes, 16 seconds
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21884751 - 07/01/15 07:59 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
millzy said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
koods said: A gun permit allows you to carry a gun in the state it is issued, just as a law or medical license only allows you to practice those professions in the states they are issued.
So you're OK with constitutional rights ending at state lines?
Should you not have the right to freedom of speech when you cross a state line?
Is gay marriage a constitutional right? Should it end at state lines?
gun rights and marriage rights are not the same.
You are correct. Gun rights are specifically granted in the Constitution. The Constitution has nothing at all to say about marriage
A marriage is a contract. Contracts must be recognized by other states, otherwise our entire legal system collapses. You drone on about states rights, then demand that a state be forced to live with the gun regulations of another state. A permit is not a contract. It is a requirement that your state imposes on it's gun owners. Other states are free to implement their own requirements.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21884762 - 07/01/15 08:01 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said: who said anything about shitting on anything? i'm just pointing out that they are not the same.
They are both rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Constitution and the Supreme Court both say that the 2nd is an individual right.
So with that out of the way:
Do rights end at state lines?
Which ones?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21884772 - 07/01/15 08:03 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: A marriage is a contract. Contracts must be recognized by other states, otherwise our entire legal system collapses. You drone on about states rights, then demand that a state be forced to live with the gun regulations of another state. A permit is not a contract. It is a requirement that your state imposes on it's gun owners. Other states are free to implement their own requirements.
Now you're being as foolish as zappa is.
They are both rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Constitution and the Supreme Court both say that the 2nd is an individual right.
So with that out of the way:
Do rights end at state lines?
Which ones?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21884784 - 07/01/15 08:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said: marriage, while left to the states, is indirectly protected by the constitution via the bill of rights, the tenth amendment as well as the fourteenth. gun rights are directly protected by the second amendment. and again, it should be self evident that they are not the same; leaving gun laws up to the states (within constitutional limits) is different than the legal quagmire that would surely arise from not having a state recognize out of state marriages. i don't even know why, or if i even should, take your claim seriously zappa.
So polygamy is also protected? Gun rights are directly protected. Do none of you not see this as an exterme over reach by the SCOTUS and understand that the rationale used has tremendous ramifications that extend far beyond same sex marriage. Not one of you has answered my question about gun laws and how they are affected nor about where marriage is mentioned in the Constitution.
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21884789 - 07/01/15 08:07 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Please. You're making an ass of yourself.
Polygamy is against the law for everyone... equally. Therefore laws against it would be constitutional.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21884793 - 07/01/15 08:09 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: nor about where marriage is mentioned in the Constitution.
I suspect you have enough sense left to know that it doesn't have to say anything at all about marriage.
Perhaps not.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21884803 - 07/01/15 08:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
They are both rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Constitution and the Supreme Court both say that the 2nd is an individual right.
So with that out of the way:
Do rights end at state lines?
Which ones?
they're guaranteed in different ways by different laws. you know, because they are different, with one being a fundamental building block of society and the other being government sanctioned gun ownership.
Quote:
zappaisgod said: So polygamy is also protected? Gun rights are directly protected. Do none of you not see this as an exterme over reach by the SCOTUS and understand that the rationale used has tremendous ramifications that extend far beyond same sex marriage. Not one of you has answered my question about gun laws and how they are affected nor about where marriage is mentioned in the Constitution.
polygamy is generally prohibited at the state level, but in my view it shouldn't be. and the SCOTUS is performing its check by design on the state legislatures by allowing same sex couples to marry. this is no more extreme than the uniquely american notion of republicanism as conceived by founding father james madison, the principle architect of the federal constitution.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21884811 - 07/01/15 08:11 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
A marriage is a contract. Contracts must be recognized by other states, otherwise our entire legal system collapses. You drone on about states rights, then demand that a state be forced to live with the gun regulations of another state. A permit is not a contract. It is a requirement that your state imposes on it's gun owners. Other states are free to implement their own requirements.
If that had been the reasoning used I could potentially buy it. But it wasn't. And you are not correct that contracts must be recognized by all states. If I enter intoa contract in Illinois that is illegal in Mississippi I am not bound if I move to Mississippi.
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21884819 - 07/01/15 08:13 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
They are both rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Constitution and the Supreme Court both say that the 2nd is an individual right.
So with that out of the way:
Do rights end at state lines?
Which ones?
they're guaranteed in different ways by different laws. you know, because they are different, with one being a fundamental building block of society and the other being government sanctioned gun ownership.
So like I said, respect the amendments you like, shit on the others. Good for you.
Now, which other rights do you think end at state lines?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21884824 - 07/01/15 08:14 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
They are both rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Constitution and the Supreme Court both say that the 2nd is an individual right.
So with that out of the way:
Do rights end at state lines?
Which ones?
they're guaranteed in different ways by different laws. you know, because they are different, with one being a fundamental building block of society and the other being government sanctioned gun ownership.
Quote:
zappaisgod said: So polygamy is also protected? Gun rights are directly protected. Do none of you not see this as an exterme over reach by the SCOTUS and understand that the rationale used has tremendous ramifications that extend far beyond same sex marriage. Not one of you has answered my question about gun laws and how they are affected nor about where marriage is mentioned in the Constitution.
polygamy is generally prohibited at the state level, but in my view it shouldn't be. and the SCOTUS is performing its check by design on the state legislatures by allowing same sex couples to marry. this is no more extreme than the uniquely american notion of republicanism as conceived by founding father james madison, the principle architect of the federal constitution.
Same sex marriage was also prohibited at the state level. Like even California voted it down
I have zero problem with same sex marriage. I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE REASONING IN THIS CASE.
--------------------
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21884837 - 07/01/15 08:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
and your problem zappa stems from your misunderstanding of the u.s. constitution. prohibiting marriage was a clear violation of the fourteenth amendment. opponents typically argue that it's a first amendment issue, but civil rights trump religious rights in this country by design. if they didn't we would be living in a theocracy, something the framers had much distaste for.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21884856 - 07/01/15 08:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Prohibiting the bearing of arms is also unconstitutional, yet some states do so while some people are OK with crapping on some rights, while whining others being shit upon.
Huh.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21884874 - 07/01/15 08:24 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said: and your problem zappa stems from your misunderstanding of the u.s. constitution. prohibiting marriage was a clear violation of the fourteenth amendment. opponents typically argue that it's a first amendment issue, but civil rights trump religious rights in this country by design. if they didn't we would be living in a theocracy, something the framers had much distaste for.
Why do you not understand that not sanctioning something does not equal prohibiting it? The government should not be in the business of marriage at all except to adjudicate in civil court the dissolution.
I'm going to bed. I'll kick your asses more tomorrow.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,062
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 2 minutes, 16 seconds
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21884883 - 07/01/15 08:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Everyone is ignoring the ninth fucking amendment which says just because it isn't in the constitution doesn't mean something can't be a right. Marriage has been considered a fundamental constitutional right for at least 150 years.
Whether you like it or not, states have latitude In the way guns are regulated. Unless you abandon the principles of states rights, you have found yourself in a quandary if you demand that one state abide by the regulations of another state.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said:
A marriage is a contract. Contracts must be recognized by other states, otherwise our entire legal system collapses. You drone on about states rights, then demand that a state be forced to live with the gun regulations of another state. A permit is not a contract. It is a requirement that your state imposes on it's gun owners. Other states are free to implement their own requirements.
If that had been the reasoning used I could potentially buy it. But it wasn't. And you are not correct that contracts must be recognized by all states. If I enter intoa contract in Illinois that is illegal in Mississippi I am not bound if I move to Mississippi.
Yes, you are. In fact, one of the reasons why this clause exists was to prevent slaves from making it to non slaves states and claiming that they were free. Non slaves states were required to recognize the ownership of the slave and return him to the owner,
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21884892 - 07/01/15 08:27 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: The government should not be in the business of marriage at all except to adjudicate in civil court the dissolution.
But since they are, it applies equally to all.
Quote:
I'll kick your asses more tomorrow.
As you haven't landed any blows yet, 'more' isn't the right word.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21884899 - 07/01/15 08:28 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
that's the tenth amendment you're thinking of koods. specifically that is known as the gauranty clause.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
Edited by millzy (07/01/15 08:29 PM)
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21884906 - 07/01/15 08:28 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Everyone is ignoring the ninth fucking amendment which says just because it isn't in the constitution doesn't mean something can't be a right. Marriage has been considered a fundamental constitutional right for at least 150 years.
He who is ignoring things himself ought not to whine about what he thinks others are ignoring.
Now:
The Constitution and the Supreme Court both say that the 2nd is an individual right.
So with that out of the way:
Do rights end at state lines?
Which ones?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,062
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 2 minutes, 16 seconds
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21884920 - 07/01/15 08:31 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said: that's the tenth amendment you're thinking of koods. specifically that is known as the gauranty clause.
No, I'm talking about the ninth:
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
In other words, there are other rights that we may have forgot to mention.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21884923 - 07/01/15 08:32 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Do rights end at state lines?
Which ones?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21884983 - 07/01/15 08:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I figured you both lacked the stones to answer.
Thanks for not disappointing.
Edit: Actually, z... m... k... the three of you repeatedly beclowned yourselves here.
Constitutional rights don't begin at state lines. They don't apply to some, but not to others.
They apply to all, equally, in every state.
I'm embarrassed for the three of you. Have the good graces to be embarrassed for yourselves.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
Edited by luvdemshrooms (07/01/15 09:01 PM)
|
|