|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much
#21877724 - 06/30/15 11:45 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Every time an issue is in a gridlock in the government or has a strong yes and a strong no side of the argument normally everything stand still and nothing happens. But every now and then a real life situation occurs where the debate become real and affects someone direclty and that someone decided to lawyer.
Suddenly, the courts are now involved. There's nothing the politicians can do about it. It has fallen on the Judicial branch. The TRUE deciders of what right or not right based directly off the constitution. No political smokescreens, no riots, no protest can stop the decision. Especially when it gets to the Supreme Court.
The "Wise men" shall decide what's what.
Recently these wise men have taken great decisions. The most known of course is gay marriage. But our Supreme Court has made several good calls in recent years too.
No matter howw fucked up the legislative branch is and completely unrepresentative of what people wants, know that the Supreme Court has your back
--------------------
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal] 3
#21877887 - 06/30/15 12:27 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said: Every time an issue is in a gridlock in the government or has a strong yes and a strong no side of the argument normally everything stand still and nothing happens. But every now and then a real life situation occurs where the debate become real and affects someone direclty and that someone decided to lawyer.
Suddenly, the courts are now involved. There's nothing the politicians can do about it. It has fallen on the Judicial branch. The TRUE deciders of what right or not right based directly off the constitution. No political smokescreens, no riots, no protest can stop the decision. Especially when it gets to the Supreme Court.
The "Wise men" shall decide what's what.
Recently these wise men have taken great decisions. The most known of course is gay marriage. But our Supreme Court has made several good calls in recent years too.
No matter howw fucked up the legislative branch is and completely unrepresentative of what people wants, know that the Supreme Court has your back
Canadians
Yeah its great to have a bunch to decide landmark cases for us. I wish there was an Amendment to state which powers belonged to states and which belong to the feds. It doesn't even have to be complicated, something like "the powers not explicitly given to the government shall be given to the states" or some shit like that.
-------------------- Lord_Senate: Pedophiles, rapists and everything in between. pastywhyte said: I'm not going to rush, I believe crow is best served cold. AhabMcBathsalts said: This is why democracy doesn't work. Because idiots like this get a fucking vote.
|
Magicman69
All About the Benjamins



Registered: 05/29/13
Posts: 6,876
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212] 1
#21877896 - 06/30/15 12:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I don't particularly like unelected judges writing law that according to the constitution should be written by congress. It sets a bad precedent. With that said I am happy gay marriage is finally legal.
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Magicman69]
#21877912 - 06/30/15 12:35 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Abortion and gay marriage are totally state issues.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21877956 - 06/30/15 12:45 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No, they are demonstrably not. According to the Supreme Court, states may not ban gay marriage or abortions. Your opinion doesn't matter.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21878051 - 06/30/15 01:08 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
See, I knew this thread would bring forth unanimity
--------------------
|
LogicaL Chaos
Ascension Energy & Alien UFOs




Registered: 05/12/07
Posts: 69,359
Loc: The Inexpressible...
Last seen: 12 minutes, 41 seconds
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21878061 - 06/30/15 01:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Does Canada have a surpreme court?
-------------------- "What you must understand is that your physical dimension affects everyone in the higher dimensions as well. All things are interconnected. All things are One. Therefore, if one dimension is broken or out of balance, then all other dimensions will experience repercussions." - Pleiadian Prophecy 2020 The New Golden Age by James Carwin PROJECT BLUE BOOK ANALYSIS! (312 pages!) | Psychedelics & UFOs | Ready to Contact UFOs? | The Source on Mushrooms | Trippy Gematrix | Dj TeknoLogical | Fentanyl Test Kits R.I.P. Big Worm || The Start of the Ascension Process was 2020. Welcome to the Next Great Era of Earth πππ
  Oregon Eclipse Festival 2017 :: Aug 19th - 21st :: Pure Paradise   Very Effective LSA Extraction Tek | π§ Advanced Cold Water LSA Extraction Method π§ |  Mescajuana - Mescaline with Marijuana | DMT Dab Bongs | UFO Technology! Shpongle
     
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: LogicaL Chaos]
#21878064 - 06/30/15 01:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
LogicaL Chaos said: Does Canada have a surpreme court?
You really, REALLY need to learn about things outside of the US
--------------------
|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,456
Loc: 613
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: LogicaL Chaos] 4
#21878124 - 06/30/15 01:25 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
LogicaL Chaos said: Does Canada have a surpreme court?
Yes. Here they are on their way towards the igloo of deliberation, carrying the traditional novelty sized shared beer mug. The cup on top 'miraculously' refills itself with beer from the keg hidden in the base.
|
D.M.T
Shroomery Contaminant


Registered: 10/31/09
Posts: 10,991
Loc: In your brain
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21878186 - 06/30/15 01:38 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said:
Quote:
LogicaL Chaos said: Does Canada have a surpreme court?
You really, REALLY need to learn about things outside of the US
He asked the question because he wanted to. 
Yes, Canada has a Supreme Court. It is overseen by the US Supreme Court.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: D.M.T] 1
#21878233 - 06/30/15 01:49 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
That's ignorant. It's overseen by the queen.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
D.M.T
Shroomery Contaminant


Registered: 10/31/09
Posts: 10,991
Loc: In your brain
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21878244 - 06/30/15 01:51 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
And she is overseen by the US Supreme Court.
|
LogicaL Chaos
Ascension Energy & Alien UFOs




Registered: 05/12/07
Posts: 69,359
Loc: The Inexpressible...
Last seen: 12 minutes, 41 seconds
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21878356 - 06/30/15 02:25 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
well, im not interested in learning about government of other countries. Super boring.
But it is interesting to hear about what cases go to the surpreme court. Thats pretty cool.
-------------------- "What you must understand is that your physical dimension affects everyone in the higher dimensions as well. All things are interconnected. All things are One. Therefore, if one dimension is broken or out of balance, then all other dimensions will experience repercussions." - Pleiadian Prophecy 2020 The New Golden Age by James Carwin PROJECT BLUE BOOK ANALYSIS! (312 pages!) | Psychedelics & UFOs | Ready to Contact UFOs? | The Source on Mushrooms | Trippy Gematrix | Dj TeknoLogical | Fentanyl Test Kits R.I.P. Big Worm || The Start of the Ascension Process was 2020. Welcome to the Next Great Era of Earth πππ
  Oregon Eclipse Festival 2017 :: Aug 19th - 21st :: Pure Paradise   Very Effective LSA Extraction Tek | π§ Advanced Cold Water LSA Extraction Method π§ |  Mescajuana - Mescaline with Marijuana | DMT Dab Bongs | UFO Technology! Shpongle
     
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21878364 - 06/30/15 02:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Those issues are more fitting at state levels. There is too much skin in the game to just leave it to nine judges
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21878436 - 06/30/15 02:48 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
They have already been adjudicated.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
Acaterpillar
A little mad...



Registered: 06/09/07
Posts: 18,693
Loc: Down the rabbit hole
Last seen: 3 months, 27 days
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Magicman69]
#21878447 - 06/30/15 02:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
LogicaL Chaos said: well, im not interested in learning about government of other countries. Super boring.
Good one 
Quote:
Magicman69 said: I don't particularly like unelected judges writing law that according to the constitution should be written by congress. It sets a bad precedent. With that said I am happy gay marriage is finally legal.
I gotta agree with this. Especially since most of them have incentive to support corporations. They are just puppets of the puppet presidents that we are forced into electing.
-------------------- Aaa...E I O Uuu...A E I O Uuu..A E I O uh Uuu.. *Cough* *Cough* Ooo...U E I O Aaa...U E I Aaa..A E I O Uuuuu... At first sight, The Perfection of Wisdom is bewildering, full of paradox and apparent irrationality.
|
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]
#21878455 - 06/30/15 02:54 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: No, they are demonstrably not. According to the Supreme Court, states may not ban gay marriage or abortions. Your opinion doesn't matter.
Please point out the word marriage in the Constitution.
--------------------
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21878458 - 06/30/15 02:55 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yup, now that precedent has been set we should just concede everything to the fed.
|
404
error


Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 14,539
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21878524 - 06/30/15 03:07 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
As a canadian why do all your threads have to do with the US? You never say eh? either... I'm beginning to suspect you aren't as canadian as you would have us all believe  (Ps did not read any replies to op when i posted this)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21878534 - 06/30/15 03:09 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said: No, they are demonstrably not. According to the Supreme Court, states may not ban gay marriage or abortions. Your opinion doesn't matter.
Please point out the word marriage in the Constitution.
I'll point you to the ninth amendment, which specifies there are rights not specified in the constitution
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
You should give this a read
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21878559 - 06/30/15 03:14 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
For me I think it's a great thing that judges don't get elected.
If these's people will be the country's top judges, I don't want them to be the winner of the charisma pageant that is the election process. I want them to get the job out of merit and track record.
We don't need other elected idiots taking important decisions. At least one of the branches of government should be operated by competent people
Now while I dunderstand that they get appointed by the elected guy that may or may not be an idiot. I know for a fact that lawyers can't just send their resumes and bullshit their way through the interview and get a supreme court job.
--------------------
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21878564 - 06/30/15 03:16 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
We did, that's why some of us are of the mind that there are some things SCOTUS shouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.
|
404
error


Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 14,539
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21878571 - 06/30/15 03:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I you want idiots not in your governments, remove the coffers and pensions being bloated by lobbyists and whatnot.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21878588 - 06/30/15 03:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Electing judges is a disaster, which is why there is such a strong movement to end the practice. The last thing you want is judges who owe favors to campaign contributors, not to mention making decisions based on public opinion, rather than the law.
Judges shouldn't be subject to the whims of fickle voters. They should not fear that a legally sound decision could cost them their jobs. If a judge has abused his power, he can be impeached.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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: 404] 1
#21878599 - 06/30/15 03:22 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
404 said: As a canadian why do all your threads have to do with the US? You never say eh? either... I'm beginning to suspect you aren't as canadian as you would have us all believe  (Ps did not read any replies to op when i posted this)
Canada is boring as fuck, that's why.
--------------------
|
Acaterpillar
A little mad...



Registered: 06/09/07
Posts: 18,693
Loc: Down the rabbit hole
Last seen: 3 months, 27 days
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21878615 - 06/30/15 03:25 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said: I know for a fact that lawyers can't just send their resumes and bullshit their way through the interview and get a supreme court job.
That's exactly what they do...
-------------------- Aaa...E I O Uuu...A E I O Uuu..A E I O uh Uuu.. *Cough* *Cough* Ooo...U E I O Aaa...U E I Aaa..A E I O Uuuuu... At first sight, The Perfection of Wisdom is bewildering, full of paradox and apparent irrationality.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Acaterpillar]
#21878628 - 06/30/15 03:27 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I mean the aides get hired that way, but judges who would be considered for a seat on the court are way beyond resumes.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod] 1
#21878634 - 06/30/15 03:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
404 said: As a canadian why do all your threads have to do with the US? You never say eh? either... I'm beginning to suspect you aren't as canadian as you would have us all believe  (Ps did not read any replies to op when i posted this)
Canada is boring as fuck, that's why.
Sadly, this is true.
Our biggest headlines right now are about the a Senator accused of assault against his wife. The second biggest is whether or not to buuild a statue in the east coast for some reason I don't reaally care about.
Then we put CNN on and we see riots, church shootings, blatant racism, cops killing people for no reason, escaped prisoners, Donald Trump thrashing Mexico and losing TV rights, etc. At some point, clearly that s more entertaining.
--------------------
|
Acaterpillar
A little mad...



Registered: 06/09/07
Posts: 18,693
Loc: Down the rabbit hole
Last seen: 3 months, 27 days
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21878638 - 06/30/15 03:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, it was really a joke. I just don't believe in the integrity of our supreme court.
-------------------- Aaa...E I O Uuu...A E I O Uuu..A E I O uh Uuu.. *Cough* *Cough* Ooo...U E I O Aaa...U E I Aaa..A E I O Uuuuu... At first sight, The Perfection of Wisdom is bewildering, full of paradox and apparent irrationality.
|
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]
#21878644 - 06/30/15 03:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said: No, they are demonstrably not. According to the Supreme Court, states may not ban gay marriage or abortions. Your opinion doesn't matter.
Please point out the word marriage in the Constitution.
I'll point you to the ninth amendment, which specifies there are rights not specified in the constitution
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
You should give this a read

All rights not specifically granted to the federal government belong to the states. Now will you please find the phrase in the Constitution that includes the word marriage. I have no problem with same sex marriage, by the way. It doesn't even nudge my Give a Shit Meter. I just don't like how it got here. Really, the people and the politicians were already well on their way. Hell, even Obama had evolved on the issue. There was no reason at all for the SCOTUS to get involved. There is no Constitutional issue and there are simple legislative cures.
I read something the other day about the ramifications of the reasoning here. Does this mean that NY will have to accept Texas gun laws?
--------------------
|
Acaterpillar
A little mad...



Registered: 06/09/07
Posts: 18,693
Loc: Down the rabbit hole
Last seen: 3 months, 27 days
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21878674 - 06/30/15 03:36 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Does this mean that NY will have to accept Texas gun laws?
Gee, I hope so.
-------------------- Aaa...E I O Uuu...A E I O Uuu..A E I O uh Uuu.. *Cough* *Cough* Ooo...U E I O Aaa...U E I Aaa..A E I O Uuuuu... At first sight, The Perfection of Wisdom is bewildering, full of paradox and apparent irrationality.
|
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]
#21878716 - 06/30/15 03:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: The last thing you want is judges who owe favors to campaign contributors, not to mention making decisions based on public opinion, rather than the law.
Yes, because it's much better to have judges who owe favors to the politicians, not to mention making decisions based on public opinion, rather than the law.
Whether elected or selected... term limits for judges.
As an aside, Roberts blew both his ACA vote and the gay marriage vote. What was really sad was watching him try to explain both away.
-------------------- 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]
#21878731 - 06/30/15 03:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said: No, they are demonstrably not. According to the Supreme Court, states may not ban gay marriage or abortions. Your opinion doesn't matter.
Please point out the word marriage in the Constitution.
I'll point you to the ninth amendment, which specifies there are rights not specified in the constitution
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
You should give this a read

All rights not specifically granted to the federal government belong to the states. Now will you please find the phrase in the Constitution that includes the word marriage. I have no problem with same sex marriage, by the way. It doesn't even nudge my Give a Shit Meter. I just don't like how it got here. Really, the people and the politicians were already well on their way. Hell, even Obama had evolved on the issue. There was no reason at all for the SCOTUS to get involved. There is no Constitutional issue and there are simple legislative cures.
I read something the other day about the ramifications of the reasoning here. Does this mean that NY will have to accept Texas gun laws?
koods is right, though not for the reasons he thinks...
The Equal Protection Clause is located at the end of 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.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21878851 - 06/30/15 04:14 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
anthony lewis makes an interesting case for judicial activism in gideon's trumpet, the novel that chronicles the 1963 SCOTUS case of gideon v. wainwright which brought indigent defendants the right to council. lewis argues that whereas the legislature deals with the people in a broad, general sense, the courts deal with individuals, and that this is how a functioning democracy should work, especially one with such an expansive civil and criminal code that tries to cover virtually every area of human concern. i would tend to agree. depending on our legislature to do anything productive now is naive anyway. the courts seem to be our only immediate path to change things as the need occurs.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
Edited by millzy (06/30/15 04:15 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: millzy]
#21878872 - 06/30/15 04:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I would disagree. The Supreme Court, or any court, should rule strictly based on law and constitution.
A court that changes things they way you want this time, might decide a different way next time.
Only the rule of law should matter.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21878904 - 06/30/15 04:23 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
the court does plenty of things i dislike. citizen's united will spell fucking disaster for our democracy.
-------------------- 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]
#21878923 - 06/30/15 04:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Citizens United was a case where they decided well. The recent ACA case was wrong. Gay marriage was right.
The point is, they need to follow the law and the constitution, not "make changes".
-------------------- 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
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides


Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21878996 - 06/30/15 04:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The way I see it, Citizen's United will in essence enable billionaires to buy an election. This is not a good thing, methinks.
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21879010 - 06/30/15 04:45 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Since marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution at all and all rights not specifically enumerated are granted to the states what would prevent a state from not granting any marriage licenses at all and then having the residents sue the federal government for unequal taxation?
I am going to say this again. I have no problem with same sex marriage. I have a huge problem with the reasoning and jurisdictional issues here.
--------------------
|
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: Le_Canard]
#21879037 - 06/30/15 04:49 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Le_Canard said: The way I see it, Citizen's United will in essence enable billionaires to buy an election. This is not a good thing, methinks.
Are you more comfortable with billionaires who own TV stations, movie companies and newspapers having a monopoly on messaging?
--------------------
|
SirShroomsAlott
Howdy



Registered: 05/15/14
Posts: 6,945
Loc: United States
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21879062 - 06/30/15 04:53 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Please forgive my stupidity in advance since I'm only asking since I really don't know the answer.
Isn't marriage in America basically a religious institution? And if so wouldn't if be a violation of the separation of church and state for government to get involved with it? Again sorry for my stupidity.
|
Acaterpillar
A little mad...



Registered: 06/09/07
Posts: 18,693
Loc: Down the rabbit hole
Last seen: 3 months, 27 days
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: SirShroomsAlott]
#21879073 - 06/30/15 04:56 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No. Marriage is a secular institution. The government has been backing it for a long time.
Christians just have a hard time perceiving the world outside of their limited view.
-------------------- Aaa...E I O Uuu...A E I O Uuu..A E I O uh Uuu.. *Cough* *Cough* Ooo...U E I O Aaa...U E I Aaa..A E I O Uuuuu... At first sight, The Perfection of Wisdom is bewildering, full of paradox and apparent irrationality.
|
SirShroomsAlott
Howdy



Registered: 05/15/14
Posts: 6,945
Loc: United States
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Acaterpillar]
#21879082 - 06/30/15 04:58 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Oh okay thank you, I only thought that because (at least if you're married in a church) you are doing it with god as your witness or whatever that is, but knew it was a stupid question since not everyone gets married in churches lol.
|
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: SirShroomsAlott]
#21879083 - 06/30/15 04:58 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No. Marriage in the US is a completely secular contract with default values and tax repercussions. There is no stricture against atheists marrying and never has been. The religious part is just ceremony. Getting the license is the legal part.
--------------------
|
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]
#21879090 - 06/30/15 05:00 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Since marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution at all and all rights not specifically enumerated are granted to the states what would prevent a state from not granting any marriage licenses at all and then having the residents sue the federal government for unequal taxation?
I am going to say this again. I have no problem with same sex marriage. I have a huge problem with the reasoning and jurisdictional issues here.
The reasoning and jurisdictional issues are covered quite nicely by the equal protection clause whether you think so or not.
It doesn't matter one way or the other if the word marriage appears in the Constitution. If government grants the right to marry to straights, the equal protection clause says it applies to gays. It's just that simple.
Civil unions for all or marriage for all. There's no in between nor should there be.
The court made the right decision, Roberts the wrong one.
-------------------- 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
|
SirShroomsAlott
Howdy



Registered: 05/15/14
Posts: 6,945
Loc: United States
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21879097 - 06/30/15 05:01 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah I figured there was a reason it wasn't, I just remembered my mom or someone telling me a long time ago that if you never did communion or something like that , that they consider you to be living in sin or something so you weren't allowed to get married in a church and most people do get married in churches which made me think it was religious. I wasn't raised with a religion so it's all kind of confusing to me how it meshes with society sometimes.
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Acaterpillar]
#21879104 - 06/30/15 05:02 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The thing is, once the Supreme votes in favor of the guy (asking for gay marriage for example) and therefore makes him win his case, the decision the Supreme Court has taken becomes applicable to all in order to prevent other similar law suit. Normal courts are case by case. But Supreme Court decisions that challenges a current law automatically repeals that law for everybody. You need a solid lawyer with one hell of a case but if he can prove that a law goes against unilateral civil liberties, then the judges has no choice but level the playing field the same way for everybody.
--------------------
|
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: Patlal]
#21879156 - 06/30/15 05:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Patlal thinks this is the end but none of you are answering my question. If a state decided to stop issuing marriage licenses entirely could it's residents prevail against the federal government in an unequal taxation case? The other question was already posed. Does NY have to accept a Texas gun license?
This is really bad. Not for it's limited impact but because of what it portends, There is not one word about marriage in the Constitution and there was a simple legislative remedy that did not require these assholes to weigh in at all. This is a usurpation of the power of the people by 5 unelected elitists. Think about what that means, children. This might well be the slipperiest slope they have gone down since their idiot interpretation of the Commerce Clause
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21879279 - 06/30/15 05:39 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said: No, they are demonstrably not. According to the Supreme Court, states may not ban gay marriage or abortions. Your opinion doesn't matter.
Please point out the word marriage in the Constitution.
I'll point you to the ninth amendment, which specifies there are rights not specified in the constitution
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
You should give this a read

All rights not specifically granted to the federal government belong to the states. Now will you please find the phrase in the Constitution that includes the word marriage. I have no problem with same sex marriage, by the way. It doesn't even nudge my Give a Shit Meter. I just don't like how it got here. Really, the people and the politicians were already well on their way. Hell, even Obama had evolved on the issue. There was no reason at all for the SCOTUS to get involved. There is no Constitutional issue and there are simple legislative cures.
I read something the other day about the ramifications of the reasoning here. Does this mean that NY will have to accept Texas gun laws?
The constitution doesn't grant rights to the federal government. It grants rights to the people.
The ninth amendment says that just because the authors didn't specifically name a right in this document, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. That's meaning of the words "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. "
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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]
#21879335 - 06/30/15 05:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Patlal thinks this is the end but none of you are answering my question. If a state decided to stop issuing marriage licenses entirely could it's residents prevail against the federal government in an unequal taxation case? The other question was already posed. Does NY have to accept a Texas gun license?
This is really bad. Not for it's limited impact but because of what it portends, There is not one word about marriage in the Constitution and there was a simple legislative remedy that did not require these assholes to weigh in at all. This is a usurpation of the power of the people by 5 unelected elitists. Think about what that means, children. This might well be the slipperiest slope they have gone down since their idiot interpretation of the Commerce Clause
You keep mentioning that the word 'marriage' doesn't appear in the constitution. It doesn't fucking matter.
The equal protection clause is clear and unambiguous.
Quote:
If a state decided to stop issuing marriage licenses entirely could it's residents prevail against the federal government in an unequal taxation case?
Hopefully. Being married or not should have zero to do with your taxes.
Quote:
Think about what that means, children.
In this particular case, it means 5 of the 9 can read a good deal better than you.
-------------------- 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: koods]
#21879344 - 06/30/15 05:55 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Answer my questions. This is a very slippery slope. If a state chooses not to issue marriage licenses at all can its citizens sue over disparate tax consequences? Does NY have to accept Texas gun permits? You are not thinking this through. And when will they have to sanction multiple marriages and what will that do to the tax code?
The government should not be in the marriage business at all.
--------------------
|
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]
#21879358 - 06/30/15 05:58 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: The government should not be in the marriage business at all.
That's true, but as long as they are... equal protection clause wins.
Rightfully so.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21879377 - 06/30/15 06:03 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Where does that end?
--------------------
|
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]
#21879419 - 06/30/15 06:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Where does that end?
Hopefully with all laws and regulations being applied equally to all citizens. Which is as it should be, though it likely never will be.
Granting things to 'your' chosen group while denying it to groups 'you' disapprove of, should never have happened. It's to our lawmakers shame that it ever did.
Note that 'you' and 'your' does not apply specifically to you, but to all who were OK with the unequal application of the law.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21879427 - 06/30/15 06:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Two words. Tax code.
--------------------
|
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]
#21879434 - 06/30/15 06:18 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
What about it? That should apply equally to all as well. Each taxpayer gets hit with the same tax rate. No exceptions. No deductions. No tax credits.
-------------------- 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
|
nicechrisman
Interdimensional space wizard



Registered: 11/07/03
Posts: 33,241
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21879440 - 06/30/15 06:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
That one crack smoking mayor of Toronto seemed pretty entertaining. What's he up to these days?
-------------------- "Cosmic Love is absolutelely ruthless and highly indifferent: it teaches its lessons whether you like/dislike them or not." John C. Lily
|
Sophistic Radiance
Free sVs!


Registered: 07/11/06
Posts: 43,135
Loc: Center of the Universe
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: psi]
#21879443 - 06/30/15 06:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psi said:
Quote:
LogicaL Chaos said: Does Canada have a surpreme court?
Yes. Here they are on their way towards the igloo of deliberation, carrying the traditional novelty sized shared beer mug. The cup on top 'miraculously' refills itself with beer from the keg hidden in the base.

-------------------- Enlil said: You really are the worst kind of person.
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21879464 - 06/30/15 06:24 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: What about it? That should apply equally to all as well. Each taxpayer gets hit with the same tax rate. No exceptions. No deductions. No tax credits.
This whole thing would be utterly irrelevant if there was no disparate treatment in the tax code and in entitlement issues. Now when are the polygamists going to bring suit? If I was one I sure as shit would drag this into the arena. With a great giant grin on my face. And the gun issue, as well. This slope is made of ice.
--------------------
|
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]
#21879499 - 06/30/15 06:33 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
There's no slope at all if the laws apply equally to all.
-------------------- 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
|
Adden

Registered: 06/04/03
Posts: 39,201
Loc:
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Magicman69]
#21879566 - 06/30/15 06:49 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Magicman69 said: I don't particularly like unelected judges writing law that according to the constitution should be written by congress. It sets a bad precedent. With that said I am happy gay marriage is finally legal.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21879573 - 06/30/15 06:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Zap. Your Texas gun law question.
What is of State jurisdiction gets solved in in the State Supreme Court. Only a few State Supreme Court verdict gets appealed in the US Supreme Court and the appeal has to be directly linked to a consitutional conflict.
Judges have to consider the argument and also look at the current state of affairs of the country. For the gay case, most states and a majority of the population had gay marraige, Therefore, those living inside the non-gay marriage were suppresed. The judges had to apply equal treatment everywhere.
As for guns. Too many states have too many different laws for the Judges to make a decision unless the plaintiff has a ridiculously convincing argument. Therefore, Texas law would not be made unanimous by federal law despite the 2nd amendment. Too many discrepancies.
The gay marriage thing was a yes or no and the majority was saying yes
--------------------
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21879597 - 06/30/15 06:57 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: There's no slope at all if the laws apply equally to all.
But they don't. Are we going to get rid of Affirmative Action and income tax brackets? Are we going to force all states to honor the gun laws of any state? I am going to say this again. I have no problem with homos marrying but this decision is so poorly reasoned it beggars belief and opens the door for a whole lot of other mischief. This is not good. We were getting there anyway. I do not know why these people decided to inject themselves at all. Seriously. I do not know why they took the case at all.
--------------------
|
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: Patlal]
#21879610 - 06/30/15 07:01 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said: Zap. Your Texas gun law question.
What is of State jurisdiction gets solved in in the State Supreme Court. Only a few State Supreme Court verdict gets appealed in the US Supreme Court and the appeal has to be directly linked to a consitutional conflict.
Judges have to consider the argument and also look at the current state of affairs of the country. For the gay case, most states and a majority of the population had gay marraige, Therefore, those living inside the non-gay marriage were suppresed. The judges had to apply equal treatment everywhere.
As for guns. Too many states have too many different laws for the Judges to make a decision unless the plaintiff has a ridiculously convincing argument. Therefore, Texas law would not be made unanimous by federal law despite the 2nd amendment. Too many discrepancies.
The gay marriage thing was a yes or no and the majority was saying yes
Aside from the fact that you are mostly incoherent the reasoning in the case largely hinged on the rationale that other states must recognize the marriages from another state
--------------------
|
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]
#21879663 - 06/30/15 07:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: There's no slope at all if the laws apply equally to all.
But they don't.
No shit.
Quote:
Are we going to get rid of Affirmative Action and income tax brackets?
Hopefully.
Quote:
Are we going to force all states to honor the gun laws of any state?
Hopefully. Your rights don't end at the state line.
Quote:
I am going to say this again.
That's too bad. The level of foolishness you're displaying isn't diminishing.
Quote:
I have no problem with homos marrying but this decision is so poorly reasoned it beggars belief and opens the door for a whole lot of other mischief.
1st. Homos? Really? Thanks for reminding me of part of the reason I stopped interacting much in Politics. 2nd. It was exactly the right decision based on the Constitution you claim to love. There was no other just decision. Any other decision would have been wrong. Legally, constitutionally and morally.
Quote:
This is not good. We were getting there anyway.
It is good. It's to the shame of Congress, the state legislatures and homophobes that it took so long.
Quote:
I do not know why these people decided to inject themselves at all. Seriously. I do not know why they took the case at all.
1. It was the right thing to do. 2. The constitution clause on equal treatment is unambiguous. That 4 justices voted the wrong way was/is an embarrassment to them and to those that oppose equal treatment for all.
The 14th is as valid as any of them. Kindly shut the fuck up with your ridiculous indignation.
-------------------- 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]
#21879705 - 06/30/15 07:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
judges don't write law; they interpret the law via case rulings that set the legal framework of an issue. having unelected judges is, by design, intended to separate them from the political process. treating judges as if they are oracles through which the law blindly flows is a school of thought that dates back to the middle ages known to jurors as declaratory theory. the more contemporary theory, judicial jurisprudence, takes into account the reality that our appellate judges are political actors because their job necessarily involves making decisions that influence society in relation to its most supreme set of laws. it could be said that conservative judges tend to behave more along the lines of the former theory whereas liberal judges tend to behave according to the latter. but even this is painting with broad strokes because supreme court justices are generally extremely intelligent individuals who think in highly abstract, fluid terms. it's difficult to pin most of them down all the way.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21879770 - 06/30/15 07:32 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I won't shut up as per my FIRST amendment right. This was being taken care of by the electorate. Even that homo basher Obama was coming around. The problem here is judicial over reach. Do you really want to cede policy to 9 unelected and basically unimpeachable people? Be careful what you wish for
I use "homo" because the homosexual people I have known in my life are not "gay". They are mostly miserable.
--------------------
|
Acaterpillar
A little mad...



Registered: 06/09/07
Posts: 18,693
Loc: Down the rabbit hole
Last seen: 3 months, 27 days
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21879794 - 06/30/15 07:36 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: I use "homo" because the homosexual people I have known in my life are not "gay". They are mostly miserable.
That sucks. Sounds like you have a bad perception of homosexuals from your limited perspective.
Most of the ones I have met are happier than your average citizen.
-------------------- Aaa...E I O Uuu...A E I O Uuu..A E I O uh Uuu.. *Cough* *Cough* Ooo...U E I O Aaa...U E I Aaa..A E I O Uuuuu... At first sight, The Perfection of Wisdom is bewildering, full of paradox and apparent irrationality.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21879819 - 06/30/15 07:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Answer my questions. This is a very slippery slope. If a state chooses not to issue marriage licenses at all can its citizens sue over disparate tax consequences? Does NY have to accept Texas gun permits? You are not thinking this through. And when will they have to sanction multiple marriages and what will that do to the tax code?
The government should not be in the marriage business at all.
Zappa the tenth ammendment concerns the POWERS of government. The Ninth ammendment concerns the RIGHTS of the people.
Marriage between two adults has been deemed a fundamental right by the court. It is well within its authority to do so, and prescribed by the ninth and 14rh amendments. A fundamental right of the people is not a power granted to a state.
A state must grant a marriage license. Marriage is a fundamental right.
Edited by koods (06/30/15 07:46 PM)
|
Almond Flour
...get off my lawn!



Registered: 12/26/08
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21879831 - 06/30/15 07:44 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yes. All worship the supreme court. Thank heavens homosexuals can get married now. AS a straight man, it makes me sleep better at night and sure influences my life.
EVERYTHING, from enjoying my evening beer, to working at my job. Everything has now changed because two guys can receive benefits for making man love.
I seriously cant express how much joy I feel. Its as if everything is suddenly right in the world.
See how fucking stupid it sounds when you say it out loud?
-------------------- Hippies and Liberals love Pope Francis, so why dont I quote him for you guys. "There is NO SALVATION outside the Catholic Church"
|
Bill_Oreilly
ANIMALS (the RAINBOW SERPENT)


Registered: 11/12/11
Posts: 26,370
Loc: Boston
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Patlal]
#21879837 - 06/30/15 07:45 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said:
Quote:
LogicaL Chaos said: Does Canada have a surpreme court?
You really, REALLY need to learn about things outside of the US
Sorry, patlal, but nobody worth a damn in the US gives 2 shits about canaduhh
-------------------- Something there is mysteriously formed, Existing before Heaven and Earth, Silent, still, standing alone, unchanging, All-pervading, unfailing, I do not know its name; I call it tao. If forced to give it a name, I call it Great (ta). Being great, it flows out; Flowing out means far-reaching; Being far-reaching, it is said to return. It's just a shot away..
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Almond Flour]
#21879846 - 06/30/15 07:47 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Almond Flour said: Yes. All worship the supreme court. Thank heavens homosexuals can get married now. AS a straight man, it makes me sleep better at night and sure influences my life.
EVERYTHING, from enjoying my evening beer, to working at my job. Everything has now changed because two guys can receive benefits for making man love.
I seriously cant express how much joy I feel. Its as if everything is suddenly right in the world.
See how fucking stupid it sounds when you say it out loud?
It's not about you. Get over yourself.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
Acaterpillar
A little mad...



Registered: 06/09/07
Posts: 18,693
Loc: Down the rabbit hole
Last seen: 3 months, 27 days
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21879865 - 06/30/15 07:50 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: I won't shut up as per my FIRST amendment right.
The constitution doesn't apply here...
-------------------- Aaa...E I O Uuu...A E I O Uuu..A E I O uh Uuu.. *Cough* *Cough* Ooo...U E I O Aaa...U E I Aaa..A E I O Uuuuu... At first sight, The Perfection of Wisdom is bewildering, full of paradox and apparent irrationality.
|
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]
#21879951 - 06/30/15 08:05 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Answer my questions. This is a very slippery slope. If a state chooses not to issue marriage licenses at all can its citizens sue over disparate tax consequences? Does NY have to accept Texas gun permits? You are not thinking this through. And when will they have to sanction multiple marriages and what will that do to the tax code?
The government should not be in the marriage business at all.
Zappa the tenth ammendment concerns the POWERS of government. The Ninth ammendment concerns the RIGHTS of the people.
Marriage between two adults has been deemed a fundamental right by the court. It is well within its authority to do so, and prescribed by the ninth and 14rh amendments. A fundamental right of the people is not a power granted to a state.
A state must grant a marriage license. Marriage is a fundamental right.
I I do not see the word marriage in either of those. You are evading the questions. I am not sure if it is because you don't understand them or because you can't handle them. In re the powers of the people even in California the people voted it down. This decision is a usurpation of the power of the people
--------------------
|
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]
#21879956 - 06/30/15 08:07 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Answer my questions. This is a very slippery slope. If a state chooses not to issue marriage licenses at all can its citizens sue over disparate tax consequences? Does NY have to accept Texas gun permits? You are not thinking this through. And when will they have to sanction multiple marriages and what will that do to the tax code?
The government should not be in the marriage business at all.
Zappa the tenth ammendment concerns the POWERS of government. The Ninth ammendment concerns the RIGHTS of the people.
Marriage between two adults has been deemed a fundamental right by the court. It is well within its authority to do so, and prescribed by the ninth and 14rh amendments. A fundamental right of the people is not a power granted to a state.
A state must grant a marriage license. Marriage is a fundamental right.
No it isn't and no state is required to grant marriage licenses at all
--------------------
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21880066 - 06/30/15 08:32 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
states write constitutions as well, and there is certainly language in state constitutions that covers marriage. this would be by the design of our republic and not because the framers weren't considering the most fundamental building block of society when drafting the federal constitution.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
Edited by millzy (06/30/15 08:32 PM)
|
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]
#21880114 - 06/30/15 08:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Like I said. The states and Congress had readily available mechanisms for this and there was absolutely no reason for the SCOTUS to even take the case. The word marriage does not appear in the Constitution anywhere
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21880126 - 06/30/15 08:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
A state constitution cannot violate the US constitution nor can it violate rights of the people.
Zappa you continue to ignore the import of the ninth ammendment which is very clear that there are rights that are not enumerated in the constitution.
Here is the key text of the gay marriage decision
Quote:
(4) The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. Same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. Baker v. Nelson is overruled. The State laws challenged by the petitioners in these cases are held invalid to the extent they exclude same-sex couples from civil marriage on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples.
The Fourteenth Amendment requires States to recognize same- sex marriages validly performed out of State. Since same-sex couples may now exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States, there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
Adden

Registered: 06/04/03
Posts: 39,201
Loc:
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod] 1
#21880136 - 06/30/15 08:45 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21880144 - 06/30/15 08:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
actually, the texas constitution has an amendment that violates the u.s. constitution regarding marriage. the reason why we have federal law is to keep the states in line.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21880209 - 06/30/15 08:59 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
myc_check1212 said: Abortion and gay marriage are totally state issues.
so you dont believe in equal protections under the law
|
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]
#21880213 - 06/30/15 09:01 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: A state constitution cannot violate the US constitution nor can it violate rights of the people.
Zappa you continue to ignore the import of the ninth ammendment which is very clear that there are rights that are not enumerated in the constitution.
Here is the key text of the gay marriage decision
Quote:
(4) The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. Same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. Baker v. Nelson is overruled. The State laws challenged by the petitioners in these cases are held invalid to the extent they exclude same-sex couples from civil marriage on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples.
The Fourteenth Amendment requires States to recognize same- sex marriages validly performed out of State. Since same-sex couples may now exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States, there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character.
You do realize the floodgates that opens, right? For thousands of years marriage has meant one thing. The only reason this is even an issue is because the government discriminates on the basis of marital status. Maybe the government should stop discriminating.
I gotta go to sleep. maybe I'll smack you around some more tomorrow
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Almond Flour]
#21880232 - 06/30/15 09:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Almond Flour said: Yes. All worship the supreme court. Thank heavens homosexuals can get married now. AS a straight man, it makes me sleep better at night and sure influences my life.
EVERYTHING, from enjoying my evening beer, to working at my job. Everything has now changed because two guys can receive benefits for making man love.
I seriously cant express how much joy I feel. Its as if everything is suddenly right in the world.
See how fucking stupid it sounds when you say it out loud?
wanna know what sounds really stupid?
"same sex marriages will destroy traditional marriage"
I mean seriously, will we now see people like yourself rushing to the courthouse so the can get a divorce from their wives and marry a homosexual?
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21880273 - 06/30/15 09:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: You do realize the floodgates that opens, right? For thousands of years marriage has meant one thing.
to the modern western world maybe, Nero had married at least 2 men, it wasnt uncommon in greece or rome up until around 350AD when a christian emperor banned same sex marriages, 13 of 14 emperors of rome were bi sexual or strictly homosexual and several of those had same sex spouses. in china same sex marriages were also not uncommon, on this contenent, while it wasnt marriage as the church would recognize it, it was also not uncommon amongst the indians, again it seems that anywhere that religions such as christianity flourished that these same sex marriages were outlawed
but hey, you can live in the dark ages and not suck dick for a wedding band
Quote:
The only reason this is even an issue is because the government discriminates on the basis of marital status. Maybe the government should stop discriminating.
insurance companies also discriminate on the basis of marital status, hospitals can refuse a non-spouse entry to the ICU which left many same sex couples in some real shit situations during a medical crisis
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21881691 - 07/01/15 05:31 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
open the floodgates to what exactly? a better society? same sex couples should be allowed to marry. polygamy, provided that everyone is a consenting adult, should be legalized too (with limits on how many people you can enter a legally binding contract with). while i'm neither gay nor poly, it seems to me that allowing people to live how they want would be for the greater good seeing that neither of these lifestyles is implicitly harmful. we spend so much time worrying about how everyone else lives, and the only people it seems to truly benefit are the elites who rule us. i wonder what type of society we would have if we spent more time paying attention to what those people are really up to instead of arguing over who marries who.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21881785 - 07/01/15 06:32 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
myc_check1212 said: Abortion and gay marriage are totally state issues.
so you dont believe in equal protections under the law
I said they are state issues. Everybody gets their say and let the chips fall where they may. In this hypothetical scenario everyone will know where they stand and can act accordingly. So a gay couple could say "oh you dont like us marrying? Cool, ill take my business, my income, and taxes elsewhere". Like a large scale Montgomery Bus Boycott. Outsiders could observe " state X doesn't alow gay marriage, lets not do business there". The flip side could work "we alow gay marriage, come one, come all, bring your families. Bring everything, salgood"
Abortion is used as birth control which flies in the face of Roe v Wades "safe,legs and rare" cop out. Abortion is a debate way beneath me.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21881802 - 07/01/15 06:43 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
When it comes to marriage, there would have been one other constitional problem for states that chose to ban gay marriage: the constitution requires that all states recognize legal and contractual agreements made in the other states. so, as long as gay marriages were recognized and legally valid in one state, every state would be required to honor those marriages. They might have gotten away with not permitting such marriages to occur within the state, but they could not prevent a couple from getting married elsewhere.
Article IV, Section 1: Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
Almond Flour
...get off my lawn!



Registered: 12/26/08
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21881897 - 07/01/15 07:44 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Almond Flour said: Yes. All worship the supreme court. Thank heavens homosexuals can get married now. AS a straight man, it makes me sleep better at night and sure influences my life.
EVERYTHING, from enjoying my evening beer, to working at my job. Everything has now changed because two guys can receive benefits for making man love.
I seriously cant express how much joy I feel. Its as if everything is suddenly right in the world.
See how fucking stupid it sounds when you say it out loud?
wanna know what sounds really stupid?
"same sex marriages will destroy traditional marriage"
I mean seriously, will we now see people like yourself rushing to the courthouse so the can get a divorce from their wives and marry a homosexual?
That was a pretty good comeback
-------------------- Hippies and Liberals love Pope Francis, so why dont I quote him for you guys. "There is NO SALVATION outside the Catholic Church"
|
Adden

Registered: 06/04/03
Posts: 39,201
Loc:
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Almond Flour]
#21881930 - 07/01/15 08:03 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
..for later.
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21881951 - 07/01/15 08:12 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said: A state constitution cannot violate the US constitution nor can it violate rights of the people.
Zappa you continue to ignore the import of the ninth ammendment which is very clear that there are rights that are not enumerated in the constitution.
Here is the key text of the gay marriage decision
Quote:
(4) The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. Same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. Baker v. Nelson is overruled. The State laws challenged by the petitioners in these cases are held invalid to the extent they exclude same-sex couples from civil marriage on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples.
The Fourteenth Amendment requires States to recognize same- sex marriages validly performed out of State. Since same-sex couples may now exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States, there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character.
You do realize the floodgates that opens, right? For thousands of years marriage has meant one thing. The only reason this is even an issue is because the government discriminates on the basis of marital status. Maybe the government should stop discriminating.
I gotta go to sleep. maybe I'll smack you around some more tomorrow
Yeah well, marriage has been around for thousands of years. It's kinda engrained in society by now. Kinda like how the most dangerous drug (alcohol) is legal everywhere and weed is illegal. Alcohol has been popular everywhere for thousands of years. It anchored itself in society.
As for the floodgates opening; yes. We will all drown in civil liberties. It's gonna be horrible.
--------------------
|
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]
#21881965 - 07/01/15 08:19 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: I won't shut up as per my FIRST amendment right.
Yup. And gays can wed because of their constitutional rights. Ain't that a bitch?
Quote:
This was being taken care of by the electorate.
Except, wahhh for you, they weren't. Fortunately we have a constitution that trumps homophobes.
Quote:
Even that homo basher Obama was coming around.
Who gives a fuck what the lying racist thinks. Soon the bigoted asshole will be a footnote in the failure section of American politics.
Quote:
The problem here is judicial over reach. Do you really want to cede policy to 9 unelected and basically unimpeachable people? Be careful what you wish for
Them ruling on constitutional issues that are clear and unambiguous is exactly what I wish for and exactly what they correctly did. This time. That's their jobs, duties and legitimate function. That doesn't mean they get them all correct, but this time they nailed it.
Quote:
I use "homo" because the homosexual people I have known in my life are not "gay". They are mostly miserable.
Seems to me you used it to get a reaction and because you're a bigot.
-------------------- 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]
#21881968 - 07/01/15 08:21 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: The word marriage does not appear in the Constitution anywhere
How fortunate for the non-bigoted that it doesn't have to.
For someone so concerned about what the constitution says, you seem to have little regard for the portions you don't like.
How sad for you.
-------------------- 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
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21882201 - 07/01/15 09:50 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
myc_check1212 said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
myc_check1212 said: Abortion and gay marriage are totally state issues.
so you dont believe in equal protections under the law
I said they are state issues. Everybody gets their say and let the chips fall where they may. In this hypothetical scenario everyone will know where they stand and can act accordingly. So a gay couple could say "oh you dont like us marrying? Cool, ill take my business, my income, and taxes elsewhere". Like a large scale Montgomery Bus Boycott. Outsiders could observe " state X doesn't alow gay marriage, lets not do business there". The flip side could work "we alow gay marriage, come one, come all, bring your families. Bring everything, salgood"
but states were not giving all people equal protection under the law, one state makes it legal while another state refuses to recognize it, if in order to make money you need to move to a different state that doesnt recognize your marriage then how will that play out and as you've just shown, this only plays well for those that can afford an interstate move. suppose that move entails crossing the country. the whole concept will allow for discrimination against some group or another for which ever rights the individual states choose
maybe you could explain it to me. how does same sex marriage harm anyone
Quote:
Abortion is used as birth control which flies in the face of Roe v Wades "safe,legs and rare" cop out. Abortion is a debate way beneath me.
well, I'm all for abortion, sure birth control is a better option but it sure as hell beats tens of thousands of additional minors and even adults pumping out kids that will be a burden on me the rest of their lives
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21882332 - 07/01/15 10:27 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
myc_check1212 said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
myc_check1212 said: Abortion and gay marriage are totally state issues.
so you dont believe in equal protections under the law
I said they are state issues. Everybody gets their say and let the chips fall where they may. In this hypothetical scenario everyone will know where they stand and can act accordingly. So a gay couple could say "oh you dont like us marrying? Cool, ill take my business, my income, and taxes elsewhere". Like a large scale Montgomery Bus Boycott. Outsiders could observe " state X doesn't alow gay marriage, lets not do business there". The flip side could work "we alow gay marriage, come one, come all, bring your families. Bring everything, salgood"
Abortion is used as birth control which flies in the face of Roe v Wades "safe,legs and rare" cop out. Abortion is a debate way beneath me.
those are both federal issues. go to college.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21882349 - 07/01/15 10:31 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I never said , nor my position is that gay marriage harms anyone. I dont have a horse in that race. My position is that gay marriage and abortion should have been left at a state vote. That's it.
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,404
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21882421 - 07/01/15 10:58 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
myc_check1212 said: I never said , nor my position is that gay marriage harms anyone. I dont have a horse in that race. My position is that gay marriage and abortion should have been left at a state vote. That's it.
your opinion is contradicted by the fact that we have a federal republic in which the states are beholden to federal law. gay marriage and abortion was left to the states, but the courts had to intervene on behalf of the public because, in both cases, the states were violating constitutional rights.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: millzy]
#21882498 - 07/01/15 11:15 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said:
Quote:
myc_check1212 said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
myc_check1212 said: Abortion and gay marriage are totally state issues.
so you dont believe in equal protections under the law
I said they are state issues. Everybody gets their say and let the chips fall where they may. In this hypothetical scenario everyone will know where they stand and can act accordingly. So a gay couple could say "oh you dont like us marrying? Cool, ill take my business, my income, and taxes elsewhere". Like a large scale Montgomery Bus Boycott. Outsiders could observe " state X doesn't alow gay marriage, lets not do business there". The flip side could work "we alow gay marriage, come one, come all, bring your families. Bring everything, salgood"
Abortion is used as birth control which flies in the face of Roe v Wades "safe,legs and rare" cop out. Abortion is a debate way beneath me.
those are both federal issues. go to college.
I'm surrounded by enough yeasty malcontents here, why pay for it and waste my time at college?
|
Beanhead
IS IRONIC PARADOX


Registered: 10/11/08
Posts: 17,257
Loc: Geospatial inversion.
Last seen: 3 years, 5 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21882596 - 07/01/15 11:37 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah make it a state issue!
All bigots should go livebe deported in one state so they can wallow in each others hate whilst the rest of the world makes love.


Edited by Beanhead (07/01/15 11:38 AM)
|
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: Beanhead]
#21882829 - 07/01/15 01:02 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You're kidding yourself if you think the rest of the world doesn't hate each other.
-------------------- 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
|
Beanhead
IS IRONIC PARADOX


Registered: 10/11/08
Posts: 17,257
Loc: Geospatial inversion.
Last seen: 3 years, 5 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21882857 - 07/01/15 01:09 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
yeah, pretty sure of that.
Edited by Beanhead (07/01/15 01:09 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: Beanhead]
#21882864 - 07/01/15 01:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Some of the truest things in life are the saddest.
Many people are full of hate for each other.
-------------------- 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: Beanhead]
#21882870 - 07/01/15 01:14 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
i don't care who hates who; living in a just society is what concerns me.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
myc_check1212
Through Brass



Registered: 05/18/09
Posts: 4,545
Loc: Rio Lobo
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: Beanhead]
#21883080 - 07/01/15 02:21 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Beanhead said: Yeah make it a state issue!
All bigots should go livebe deported in one state so they can wallow in each others hate whilst the rest of the world makes love.



Who said anything about bigotry, I believe the issue at hand is where are the lines between the courts?
@everyone, that yeasty malcontents wasn't directed at those participating in this civil discourse. I got cunty, and I apologize
|
Beanhead
IS IRONIC PARADOX


Registered: 10/11/08
Posts: 17,257
Loc: Geospatial inversion.
Last seen: 3 years, 5 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21883095 - 07/01/15 02:24 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I was mostly trying to provoke
|
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]
#21884053 - 07/01/15 05:58 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: When it comes to marriage, there would have been one other constitional problem for states that chose to ban gay marriage: the constitution requires that all states recognize legal and contractual agreements made in the other states. so, as long as gay marriages were recognized and legally valid in one state, every state would be required to honor those marriages. They might have gotten away with not permitting such marriages to occur within the state, but they could not prevent a couple from getting married elsewhere.
Article IV, Section 1: Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof
I ask again. Does this not apply to gun laws as well? Should a pistol permit issued in Idaho not be honored in NY?
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21884367 - 07/01/15 06:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
A marriage is a legally binding contract. A permit is a license. Contracts just be honored everywhere. Licenses are only good in the jurisdiction they are issued, unless there is some type of voluntary reciprocity agreement.
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.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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] 1
#21884455 - 07/01/15 07:09 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
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?
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21884608 - 07/01/15 07:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
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.
-------------------- 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]
#21884616 - 07/01/15 07:27 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: A marriage is a legally binding contract. A permit is a license. Contracts just be honored everywhere. Licenses are only good in the jurisdiction they are issued, unless there is some type of voluntary reciprocity agreement.
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.
Do you know that as soon as you are issued a marriage license you are married in the eyes of the law? The ceremony is irrelevant and unnecessary. Many states use a universal bar exam and I don't think you are right about doctors. Gun rights are specifically protected in the Constitution and the reasoning in this case would require that all states accept any other state's permits. This decision overcomes reciprocity statutes. So if reciprocity doesn't apply to marriage why would it apply to guns?
--------------------
|
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]
#21884627 - 07/01/15 07:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
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
--------------------
|
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]
#21884641 - 07/01/15 07:33 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
millzy said: gun rights and marriage rights are not the same.
Both are constitutional rights. Why does one end at state lines and one does not? What 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
|
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]
#21884662 - 07/01/15 07:37 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: The Constitution has nothing at all to say about marriage
You can't be that numb. The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment says laws apply equally to all. If straights can marry, gays can marry.
-------------------- 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]
#21884676 - 07/01/15 07:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
"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."
You come off as foolish each time you gloss over the 14th. Give it a rest.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21884681 - 07/01/15 07:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: The Constitution has nothing at all to say about marriage
You can't be that numb. The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment says laws apply equally to all. If straights can marry, gays can marry.
So can pedophiles? Polygamists? Where is the end? You and I agree almost all the time and I fully support same sex marriage but I find this judicial reasoning to be very scary. I do not think the government should be in the business of sanctioning marriage at all and the tax code should be neutral on it
--------------------
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21884689 - 07/01/15 07:44 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: "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."
You come off as foolish each time you gloss over the 14th. Give it a rest.
What protection is at issue?
--------------------
|
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]
#21884699 - 07/01/15 07:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It says what it says with no ambiguity. nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Pedophilia is against the law for everyone... equally. Polygamy is against the law for everyone... equally.
Marriage was legal for straights, now it's legal for gays... equally. As it should be. . You're making an ass of yourself.
-------------------- 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]
#21884703 - 07/01/15 07:47 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: "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."
You come off as foolish each time you gloss over the 14th. Give it a rest.
What protection is at issue?
Really?
Just stop beclowning yourself. It's rather pathetic.
-------------------- 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]
#21884716 - 07/01/15 07:50 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
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.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
Edited by millzy (07/01/15 07:51 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: millzy]
#21884734 - 07/01/15 07:53 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
There's no difference but it's not too surprising to see people being OK with shitting on some of them.
A right is a right even if you don't like it.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21884745 - 07/01/15 07:58 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
who said anything about shitting on anything? i'm just pointing out that they are not the same.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
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 βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
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 βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
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 βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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)
|
Algo
Backstrap Fever


Registered: 12/15/14
Posts: 3,857
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21884992 - 07/01/15 08:48 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
They held up obamacare aint nothing good about that.
--------------------
|
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: Algo]
#21885009 - 07/01/15 08:50 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Correct. Obamacare should, and likely will, die a slow painful death. Either legislatively or financially.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21886821 - 07/02/15 08:37 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: 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.
I went to bed. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and it isn't a right.
Now will you answer my questions about polygamy and gun rights. Because none of you seem to be able to explain why this reasoning doesn't apply EQUALLY to them.
I am going to repeat myself for the daft who still don't seem to get my position. I do not oppose same sex marriage at all. I oppose the court imposing itself on the issue when there are clear legislative methods available and we were moving there anyway quite rapidly.
--------------------
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21886824 - 07/02/15 08:38 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: Correct. Obamacare should, and likely will, die a slow painful death. Either legislatively or financially.
Either it will or we will.
My prediction is that when it craters there will be a huge push to replace it with commiecare
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: myc_check1212]
#21886840 - 07/02/15 08:42 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
myc_check1212 said: I never said , nor my position is that gay marriage harms anyone. I dont have a horse in that race. My position is that gay marriage and abortion should have been left at a state vote. That's it.
why do you keep entering your horse into the race
the 14th amendment of the bill of rights clearly states that all people will have equal protection under the law, if someone in boston weds a same sex partner and moves to georgia where their marriage isnt recognized, does that afford them equal protection? the moment the states stepped in and started issuing marriage licenses and regulating marriage and divorce, removing it from the hands of the church they made it a federal issue
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21886849 - 07/02/15 08:44 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: I went to bed. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and it isn't a right.
breathing isnt mentioned in the constitution so it's not a right
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21887090 - 07/02/15 09:35 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Where does that end?
Hopefully with all laws and regulations being applied equally to all citizens. Which is as it should be, though it likely never will be.
Granting things to 'your' chosen group while denying it to groups 'you' disapprove of, should never have happened. It's to our lawmakers shame that it ever did.
Note that 'you' and 'your' does not apply specifically to you, but to all who were OK with the unequal application of the law.
Funny how the supreme court doesn't see AA as unewual protection under the law.
|
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: Prisoner#1]
#21887241 - 07/02/15 10:04 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: I went to bed. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and it isn't a right.
breathing isnt mentioned in the constitution so it's not a right
I believe it is since it is essential to life. My personal opinion is that the government should net be sanctioning any marriages at all and the tax code should say nothing about it as well.
Now then, perhaps one of you intellectual lightweights can explain to me why the reasoning in this decision should not be used to impose Idaho gun laws on NY and allow polygamy
--------------------
|
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: Shins]
#21887244 - 07/02/15 10:05 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Where does that end?
Hopefully with all laws and regulations being applied equally to all citizens. Which is as it should be, though it likely never will be.
Granting things to 'your' chosen group while denying it to groups 'you' disapprove of, should never have happened. It's to our lawmakers shame that it ever did.
Note that 'you' and 'your' does not apply specifically to you, but to all who were OK with the unequal application of the law.
Funny how the supreme court doesn't see AA as unewual protection under the law.
They're getting there. They agreed to take another case about it. It is unequal protection as are all preferences
--------------------
|
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]
#21887373 - 07/02/15 10:38 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: 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.
I went to bed. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and it isn't a right.
Doesn't have to be mentioned thanks to the 14th.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Quote:
Now will you answer my questions about polygamy and gun rights. Because none of you seem to be able to explain why this reasoning doesn't apply EQUALLY to them.
Again? How many times will this be necessary?
Polygamy is against the law for everyone... equally. Therefore laws against it would be constitutional.
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/21884789#21884789
Quote:
I am going to repeat myself for the daft who still don't seem to get my position. I do not oppose same sex marriage at all.
Sorry, at this point 'bullshit' is the opperative word.
Quote:
I oppose the court imposing itself on the issue when there are clear legislative methods available and we were moving there anyway quite rapidly.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
14th. It, despite your whining and kvetching, is part of the constitution. As such, the court acted properly and reached them correct decision.
-------------------- 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: Shins]
#21887377 - 07/02/15 10:39 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Where does that end?
Hopefully with all laws and regulations being applied equally to all citizens. Which is as it should be, though it likely never will be.
Granting things to 'your' chosen group while denying it to groups 'you' disapprove of, should never have happened. It's to our lawmakers shame that it ever did.
Note that 'you' and 'your' does not apply specifically to you, but to all who were OK with the unequal application of the law.
Funny how the supreme court doesn't see AA as unewual protection under the law.
It should. It's to their shame that they don't.
-------------------- 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]
#21887386 - 07/02/15 10:42 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: I went to bed. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and it isn't a right.
breathing isnt mentioned in the constitution so it's not a right
I believe it is since it is essential to life. My personal opinion is that the government should net be sanctioning any marriages at all and the tax code should say nothing about it as well.
Now then, perhaps one of you intellectual lightweights can explain to me why the reasoning in this decision should not be used to impose Idaho gun laws on NY and allow polygamy
Both have been done. Apparently you were sleeping through it which explains even koods kicking your ass.
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/21884455#21884455
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21887934 - 07/02/15 01:28 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: 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.
I went to bed. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and it isn't a right.
Doesn't have to be mentioned thanks to the 14th.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Quote:
Now will you answer my questions about polygamy and gun rights. Because none of you seem to be able to explain why this reasoning doesn't apply EQUALLY to them.
Again? How many times will this be necessary?
Polygamy is against the law for everyone... equally. Therefore laws against it would be constitutional.
And same sex marriage was illegal for everyone..... equally. Therefor laws against it would be constitutional.
--------------------
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21888109 - 07/02/15 02:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: 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.
I went to bed. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and it isn't a right.
Doesn't have to be mentioned thanks to the 14th.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Quote:
Now will you answer my questions about polygamy and gun rights. Because none of you seem to be able to explain why this reasoning doesn't apply EQUALLY to them.
Again? How many times will this be necessary?
Polygamy is against the law for everyone... equally. Therefore laws against it would be constitutional.
And same sex marriage was illegal for everyone..... equally. Therefor laws against it would be constitutional.
I was constitutional, but popular movements decided that allow men and women to marry and not allowing men and men to be married should be considered the same even if the church doesn't agree.
--------------------
|
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: Patlal]
#21888134 - 07/02/15 02:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
They aren't that popular. They usually lose at the ballot box but they were getting closer and that is where the decision should have been made
--------------------
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21888176 - 07/02/15 02:24 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: They aren't that popular. They usually lose at the ballot box but they were getting closer and that is where the decision should have been made
More than 66% of the states agreed to gay marriage. Normally 66% is the cut off point for extraordinary votes. Therefore gays in these states were being discriminated upon
--------------------
|
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: Patlal]
#21888214 - 07/02/15 02:34 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
When it got put to a vote it even lost in California. Polygamy has a longer tradition than same sex marriage which is specifically forbidden in the texts that most people follow. Why is it not allowed? And why can't this reasoning be applied to polygamists. And disparate gun rights from state to state? What gives NY the right to tell someone who legally owns a gun that they cannot bring it to NY? It is unequal.
We were getting there anyway. We did not need these peckerheads to invent yet another right.
--------------------
|
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]
#21888244 - 07/02/15 02:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: And same sex marriage was illegal for everyone..... equally. Therefor laws against it would be constitutional.
I'm embarrassed for you.
If marriage was allowed for straights, marriage must be allowed for gays.
Quit trolling. You're coming off quite buffoonish.
And before you repeat the stupidity you've exhibited by asking about pedos & polys, that's, as was pointed out before, is illegal for all.
You're smarter than this. I can only assume you were whacked in the head with a hammer.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21888272 - 07/02/15 02:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Then it must be allowed for polygamists. I don't think I ever mentioned pedos. I have repeatedly said that I do not oppose homosexual marriage. I object to the invention of a new "right". I oppose the court inventing new nonsense. This was in the purview of legislatures, not the fucking court. Apparently you don't think there should be any limits on their power. The rationale you are using to justify this can be applied to anything. That is my issue here and if you cannot see that even after repeated iterations then you are the one beclowning yourself.
--------------------
|
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]
#21889191 - 07/02/15 05:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
As poly is outlawed for all... you lose again.
If you are unable or unwilling to see that applicability of the phrase "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, you're trolling, lying or have recently suffered a stroke.
Whichever, I weep for you. You've gone past beclowning yourself.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21889303 - 07/02/15 06:11 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Same sex marriage was outlawed for all as well. You have the legal reasoning ability of a ten year old. Anyway, it begins
http://www.krtv.com/story/29450937/montana-polygamist-family-applies-for-marriage-license
Tell me why they cannot prevail under your reasoning.
--------------------
|
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]
#21891406 - 07/03/15 06:00 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
So, still 3 or 4 times your reasoning ability.
Multiple marriage is against the law for all. Marriage between 2 people was against the law for some.
Read it and weep.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
No wonder it was so easy for certain posters to drive you from Politics. There's just no challenge in pointing out the stupidity of some of your positions.
Early onset Alzheimer's perhaps? Seek help.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892605 - 07/03/15 01:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/scalias-full-dissent-same-sex-marriage-ruling
Quote:
I join THE CHIEF JUSTICEβs opinion in full. I write separately to call attention to this Courtβs threat to American democracy.
The substance of todayβs decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, from tax treatment to rights of inheritance.
Those civil consequencesβand the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidencesβcan perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Todayβs decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in factβ and the furthest extension one can even imagineβof the Courtβs claimed power to create βlibertiesβ that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.
Marriage between two people of the same gender was also against the law. Are you arguing that number is protection or of particular difference? Because that's stupid.
The government should get out of the marriage sanctioning business entirely.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21892616 - 07/03/15 01:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quoting scalia. 
The guy has no business being a judge of anything. He is an emotional fool beholden to catholic doctrine.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21892626 - 07/03/15 01:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
of the Courtβs claimed power to create βlibertiesβ that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention.
Again, the fucking ninth ammendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Scalia is an embarrassment.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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]
#21892635 - 07/03/15 01:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
He has respect for the Constitution unlike five feckless cunts on the bench and the current occupant of the White House.
We were getting to homo marriage the proper way. Do you not understand his point? 5 unelected and unremovable judges should not be the arbiters of this. It should be the people. I find it very intimidating that 5 judges can impose their political will and invent rights that are clearly nonexistent against the will of the electorate. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21892640 - 07/03/15 01:18 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Well, then you should leave the US because that is the way our government works.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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]
#21892685 - 07/03/15 01:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No. We need to get rid of some of these judges.
--------------------
|
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]
#21892698 - 07/03/15 01:35 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/scalias-full-dissent-same-sex-marriage-ruling
Quote:
I join THE CHIEF JUSTICEβs opinion in full. I write separately to call attention to this Courtβs threat to American democracy.
The substance of todayβs decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, from tax treatment to rights of inheritance.
Those civil consequencesβand the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidencesβcan perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Todayβs decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in factβ and the furthest extension one can even imagineβof the Courtβs claimed power to create βlibertiesβ that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.
Marriage between two people of the same gender was also against the law. Are you arguing that number is protection or of particular difference? Because that's stupid.
The government should get out of the marriage sanctioning business entirely.
Quoting the guy from the losing side. How convincing! 
I guess the beating you've taken in this thread has robbed you of your remaining common sense (and ability to read the written word unambiguously)
Bigot.
-------------------- 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]
#21892707 - 07/03/15 01:37 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Quoting scalia. 
The guy has no business being a judge of anything. He is an emotional fool beholden to catholic doctrine.
Quote:
koods said: Quoting scalia.
That was pretty funny seeing as Scalia was complaining that the written word needs to mean what the written word says. He was right about that.
Here's the pertinent written words:
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
He and zappa could use a good circle jerk.
-------------------- 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]
#21892709 - 07/03/15 01:39 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: He has respect for the Constitution unlike five feckless cunts on the bench and the current occupant of the White House.
We were getting to homo marriage the proper way. Do you not understand his point? 5 unelected and unremovable judges should not be the arbiters of this. It should be the people. I find it very intimidating that 5 judges can impose their political will and invent rights that are clearly nonexistent against the will of the electorate. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution.

You should retake high school civics.
How odd that I've never seen you complain when you agree with the courts decision.

Quote:
5 9 unelected and unremovable judges should not be the arbiters of this.
At least get that right.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892714 - 07/03/15 01:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You still seem to not understand either my or Scalia's objection. I have no objection to homos getting married. But that should be decided by the states and the electorate. I do not know why you are willing to cede control to the slimmest possible majority of unelected and unaccountable oligarchs. I guess you prefer a dictatorship to and elective republic. There is not one single word about marriage in the Constitution. Thus the right to regulate marriage is reserved to the states.
--------------------
|
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]
#21892720 - 07/03/15 01:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No, I understand your position. It's wrong, bigoted and moronic.
Quote:
I have no objection to homos getting married.
Of course not. 
Quote:
There is not one single word about marriage in the Constitution.
Doesn't have to be. That comes across as more stupid each time you say it.
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
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892736 - 07/03/15 01:48 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: He has respect for the Constitution unlike five feckless cunts on the bench and the current occupant of the White House.
We were getting to homo marriage the proper way. Do you not understand his point? 5 unelected and unremovable judges should not be the arbiters of this. It should be the people. I find it very intimidating that 5 judges can impose their political will and invent rights that are clearly nonexistent against the will of the electorate. Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution.

You should retake high school civics.
How odd that I've never seen you complain when you agree with the courts decision.

Why would I complain when I agree? When they adhere to the text I have no problem. I have quoted the relevant text several times. Do you know what other decision I object to? Roe v Wade. Not because I oppose abortion rights but because the judges should not be the people deciding. I have actually read Blackmun's decision and aside from a bunch of other flaws there was one that I knew would rear its ugly head in a few years. The rationale for determining when it is unacceptable except in the most dire conditions and that is viability. In Blackmun's time it was 26 weeks and the fetus did not survive before that. Now we have improved technology so much that 20 weeks is doable. So are we to repeal the decision?
--------------------
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892743 - 07/03/15 01:50 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: No, I understand your position. It's wrong, bigoted and moronic.
Quote:
I have no objection to homos getting married.
Of course not. 
Quote:
There is not one single word about marriage in the Constitution.
Doesn't have to be. That comes across as more stupid each time you say it.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
So now we will have polygamy. And every state will have to accept every other state's gun permits. Equal protection, right?
--------------------
|
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]
#21892745 - 07/03/15 01:51 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It's the judges job.
Watching your bigoted self melt down over this has been one of my most amusing times at the Shroomery.
The judges did their job in a way you don't like, so now you say it's not their job to do their job.
Boo-fucking-hoo Bigot.
-------------------- 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]
#21892759 - 07/03/15 01:54 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: So now we will have polygamy. And every state will have to accept every other state's gun permits. Equal protection, right?
Your memory appears to be shorter than my dick.
Polygamy is against the law for all and not just for a group that bigots and homophobes disapprove of. That is equal.
And as I've pointed out before, gun rights (being a constitutional right) do apply nationwide. Some states just have yet to catch on... like you and gay marriage.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892767 - 07/03/15 01:56 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Look, you're wasting your time.
The court followed the constitution, acted correctly and constitutionally.
Your butthurt makes it seem as if you're afraid 'gay' will rub off on you. They won't bite... unless you ask.
-------------------- 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: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: zappaisgod]
#21892785 - 07/03/15 02:00 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: You still seem to not understand either my or Scalia's objection. I have no objection to homos getting married. But that should be decided by the states and the electorate. I do not know why you are willing to cede control to the slimmest possible majority of unelected and unaccountable oligarchs. I guess you prefer a dictatorship to and elective republic. There is not one single word about marriage in the Constitution. Thus the right to regulate marriage is reserved to the states.
Scalia believes that people rights should be up to popular vote.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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]
#21892790 - 07/03/15 02:01 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Scalia believes that people rights should be up to popular vote.
Apparently Clearly, so does zappa.
-------------------- 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: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21892793 - 07/03/15 02:01 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It should also be pointed out that the Supreme Court only upheld the decisions of the lower courts.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892800 - 07/03/15 02:03 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: So now we will have polygamy. And every state will have to accept every other state's gun permits. Equal protection, right?
Your memory appears to be shorter than my dick.
Polygamy is against the law for all and not just for a group that bigots and homophobes disapprove of. That is equal.
And as I've pointed out before, gun rights (being a constitutional right) do apply nationwide. Some states just have yet to catch on... like you and gay marriage.
Why are you bigoted against polygamists.
Are you incapable of reading? I said several times that I have no problem with homosexuals marrying each other. I have a problem with the court usurping powers that should be reserved to the states and the people who live in them. Thickness.
--------------------
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892808 - 07/03/15 02:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
koods said: Scalia believes that people rights should be up to popular vote.
Apparently Clearly, so does zappa.
Where is there a right to marriage? It is statutory, not enshrined. No state is required to grant any marriage licenses at all. The Constitution does not mention marriage.. If 49 states decided to stop issuing marriage licenses but kept doing it would they be forced on all states just because of one?
--------------------
|
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]
#21892813 - 07/03/15 02:07 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Why are you bigoted against polygamists.
I actually don't care if people practice polygamy. That won't rub off on me either.
Quote:
Are you incapable of reading? I said several times that I have no problem with homosexuals marrying each other.
I read the words. I just don't believe you.
Quote:
I have a problem with the court usurping powers that should be reserved to the states and the people who live in them. Thickness.
The court followed the constitution, acted correctly and constitutionally.
-------------------- 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]
#21892831 - 07/03/15 02:11 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Where is there a right to marriage?
Doesn't need to be one.
Quote:
It is statutory, not enshrined.
Yup.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Quote:
No state is required to grant any marriage licenses at all.
m So what? If they grant them to straights, they must grant them to gays.
Quote:
The Constitution does not mention marriage..
Wahh. It doesn't have to.
Quote:
If 49 states decided to stop issuing marriage licenses but kept doing it would they be forced on all states just because of one?
I doubt it, but if a state grants it to straights, they must grant it to gays.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892836 - 07/03/15 02:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It most certainly did not follow the Constitution and acted strictly to expand it's own power. Which is my objection and Scalia's. I don't think these unelected and unremovable people should have that much power to impose what may or may not be acceptable to the states and the electorate. There is no explicit right to marriage at all in the Constitution
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21892842 - 07/03/15 02:13 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I suppose you disagree with the loving decision, which also relied on the right to marry when overturning bans in interracial marriage?
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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]
#21892846 - 07/03/15 02:14 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: It most certainly did not follow the Constitution
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Quote:
Which is my objection and Scalia's.
So you and Scalia share a moronic opinion. Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Quote:
I don't think these unelected and unremovable people should have that much power to impose what may or may not be acceptable to the states and the electorate.
And yet... they do.
Quote:
There is no explicit right to marriage at all in the Constitution
Doesn't have to be.
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
|
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]
#21892850 - 07/03/15 02:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: I suppose you disagree with the loving decision, which also relied on the right to marry when overturning bans in interracial marriage?
I'm unfamiliar with the Loving decision. I'll go look at it.
-------------------- 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: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21892858 - 07/03/15 02:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
That was for Zappa.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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]
#21892862 - 07/03/15 02:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: I suppose you disagree with the loving decision, which also relied on the right to marry when overturning bans in interracial marriage?
Ah, I didn't recognize the decisions name. The Loving decision was also decided correctly.
-------------------- 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]
#21892868 - 07/03/15 02:18 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The Re: luvdemshrooms made it seem otherwise.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892873 - 07/03/15 02:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
How appalling that it took until 1967 to do away with that.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892877 - 07/03/15 02:21 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Where is there a right to marriage?
Doesn't need to be one.
So once again unelected and unremovable people invented a rightQuote:
Quote:
It is statutory, not enshrined.
Yup.
Then it should be removable by statuteQuote:
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
All homosexuals were always free to marry anybody they wanted of the opposite sex. Equal protection. Exactly equal.Quote:
Quote:
No state is required to grant any marriage licenses at all.
m So what? If they grant them to straights, they must grant them to gays.
They have to allow homosexuals the right to marry somebody of the opposite sex. This is not an uncommon occurrence.Quote:
Quote:
The Constitution does not mention marriage..
Wahh. It doesn't have to.
Then it is reserved to the states to decideQuote:
Quote:
If 49 states decided to stop issuing marriage licenses but kept doing it would they be forced on all states just because of one?
I doubt it, but if a state grants it to straights, they must grant it to gays.
Why? Why does your logic not grant me the right to marry my cats? Or 3 women? Or 3 men? I WANT EQUAL PROTECTION!
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 6 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: koods]
#21892878 - 07/03/15 02:21 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
From the Loving decision 1967:
Quote:
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
--------------------
NotSheekle said βif I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to herβ
|
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]
#21892891 - 07/03/15 02:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: That was for Zappa.
Quote:
The case was brought by Mildred Loving, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, who had been sentenced to a year in prison in Virginia for marrying each other. Their marriage violated the state's anti-miscegenation statute, the Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which prohibited marriage between people classified as "white" and people classified as "colored". The Supreme Court's unanimous decision determined that this prohibition was unconstitutional, reversing Pace v. Alabama (1883) and ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States.
This is a different issue entirely. First of all the state issued the marriage license in the first place. Second of all this involved prison.
--------------------
|
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]
#21892904 - 07/03/15 02:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: So once again unelected and unremovable people invented a right
No, they simply enforced an existing one.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Quote:
Then it should be removable by statute
States are free to remove marriage for everyone. Homophobes and bigots just don't get to pick and choose. How sad for you.
Quote:
All homosexuals were always free to marry anybody they wanted of the opposite sex. Equal protection. Exactly equal.
Really? 
Quote:
They have to allow homosexuals the right to marry somebody of the opposite sex.
Nope. Supreme court and then 14th say otherwise. WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
Quote:
This is not an uncommon occurrence.
Yup. Now it'll be far more common for gays as well, seeing as the Supreme Court bitch-slapped people like you. Bigot.
Quote:
Then it is reserved to the states to decide
Except nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Quote:
Why? Why does your logic not grant me the right to marry my cats? Or 3 women? Or 3 men? I WANT EQUAL PROTECTION!
Because that's against the law for... wait for it... everyone. Equally.
The bigots and homophobes lost.
-------------------- 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: koods]
#21892907 - 07/03/15 02:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: From the Loving decision 1967:
Quote:
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
You know what's hilarious about that? That the vast majority of Negro children grow up in homes that eschew marriage. Did that decision mention gender? Because It isn't "fundamental to our very existence and survival" that homosexuals marry.
--------------------
|
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]
#21892912 - 07/03/15 02:31 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Why would it not surprise if you were against "them damn darkies polluting our pure white women" as well?
-------------------- 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]
#21892920 - 07/03/15 02:33 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Because It isn't "fundamental to our very existence and survival" that homosexuals marry.
It isn't "fundamental to our very existence and survival" that straights marry.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892925 - 07/03/15 02:34 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: So once again unelected and unremovable people invented a right
No, they simply enforced an existing one.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Quote:
Then it should be removable by statute
States are free to remove marriage for everyone. Homophobes and bigots just don't get to pick and choose. How sad for you.
Quote:
All homosexuals were always free to marry anybody they wanted of the opposite sex. Equal protection. Exactly equal.
Really? 
Quote:
They have to allow homosexuals the right to marry somebody of the opposite sex.
Nope. Supreme court and then 14th say otherwise. WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
Quote:
This is not an uncommon occurrence.
Yup. Now it'll be far more common for gays as well, seeing as the Supreme Court bitch-slapped people like you. Bigot.
Quote:
Then it is reserved to the states to decide
Except nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Quote:
Why? Why does your logic not grant me the right to marry my cats? Or 3 women? Or 3 men? I WANT EQUAL PROTECTION!
Because that's against the law for... wait for it... everyone. Equally.
The bigots and homophobes lost.
Once again you pretzel yourself. The laws against same sex marriage meet your standard of applying to everyone. Everyone was not allowed to marry someone of the same sex and everyone was allowed to marry someone of the opposite sex. Equal protection. You are not being very smart here.
--------------------
|
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]
#21892938 - 07/03/15 02:38 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|

If you say so. Perhaps if your bigotry wasn't getting the better of you...
I'm really enjoying watching you beclown yourself.
Your fear of gays not withstanding.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892945 - 07/03/15 02:39 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I do not fear homosexuals. I fear Supreme Court judges.
--------------------
|
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]
#21892951 - 07/03/15 02:40 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Right.
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21892967 - 07/03/15 02:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Homosexuals cannot do shit to me. Supreme Court judges are another matter
--------------------
|
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]
#21892972 - 07/03/15 02:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|

And yet gay marriage has you drooling with indignation.
Got anything new to add or are you simply going to keep on being a bigot?
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21893003 - 07/03/15 02:50 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I do not care if homosexuals marry. If it was on a referendum I would vote in favor unlike most Californians. I care that the Supreme Court thinks they are our rulers. It is not their decision to make and the rationale for it can lead to a whole shitload of future nonsense
--------------------
|
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]
#21893016 - 07/03/15 02:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: I do not care if homosexuals marry.
Of course not.
Quote:
If it was on a referendum I would vote in favor unlike most Californians.
Right.
Quote:
I care that the Supreme Court thinks they are our rulers. It is not their decision to make and the rationale for it can lead to a whole shitload of future nonsense
It was, is and shall remain their job.
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
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21893025 - 07/03/15 02:53 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Repeal the 14th. Then it won't be their job any more.
-------------------- 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]
#21893033 - 07/03/15 02:54 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
How long were you drooling with anger when the court said interracial marriage was legal?
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21893088 - 07/03/15 03:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Not at all. The 10th trumps the 14th and you can't satisfactorily answer the question on polygamy or my cats.
--------------------
|
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]
#21893097 - 07/03/15 03:08 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Both were answered. Are you standing on your head so that the drool runs into your eyes?
Amendments don't trump other amendments... unless you're a bigot.
-------------------- 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]
#21893109 - 07/03/15 03:11 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- 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: luvdemshrooms]
#21893119 - 07/03/15 03:13 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
But we need not speculate. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases. When it comes to determining the meaning of a vague constitutional provisionβsuch as βdue process of lawβ or βequal protection of the lawsββit is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification. We have no basis for striking down a practice that is not expressly prohibited by the Fourteenth Amendmentβs text, and that bears the endorsement of a long tradition of open, widespread, and unchallenged use dating back to the Amendmentβs ratification. Since there is no doubt whatever that the People never decided to prohibit the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples, the public debate over same-sex marriage must be allowed to continue.
--------------------
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21893141 - 07/03/15 03:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: Looks like one of your bigots-in-arms may have screwed himself..
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/07/first-openly-gay-member-of-texas-legislature-filed-complaint-against-paxton-with-state-bar.html/
Why do you keep saying I'm a bigot when my only concern is about excessive power in the Supreme Court? I do not care what you do with your 2 inch dich
--------------------
|
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]
#21893157 - 07/03/15 03:21 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
How fortunate most of the country has matured. Except for the bigots of course.
You may be stunned to hear that once upon a time, no-one doubted the constitutionality of slavery. I bet you miss those days.
You may be stunned to hear that once upon a time, no-one doubted the constitutionality of prohibiting interracial marriage. I bet you miss those days as well.
How lame that you again quote one of the losing side. Of course he's butthurt. He lost. Just like you.
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
|
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]
#21893169 - 07/03/15 03:24 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Why do you keep saying I'm a bigot when my only concern is about excessive power in the Supreme Court?
Because you certainly come across as one.
The court constitutionally and correctly exercised it's responsibilities in reaching the correct decision.
All your whining and drooling won't change that. Repeal the 14th if you can.
-------------------- 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
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 6 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21893387 - 07/03/15 04:18 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Jesus fucking christ Zap, how many fucking times do we have to explain it to you???
--------------------
|
Almond Flour
...get off my lawn!



Registered: 12/26/08
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: I'm starting to like Supreme Courts very much [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21894044 - 07/03/15 07:08 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: How fortunate most of the country has matured. Except for the bigots of course.
You may be stunned to hear that once upon a time, no-one doubted the constitutionality of slavery. I bet you miss those days.
You may be stunned to hear that once upon a time, no-one doubted the constitutionality of prohibiting interracial marriage. I bet you miss those days as well.
How lame that you again quote one of the losing side. Of course he's butthurt. He lost. Just like you.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Sorry my friend, but this isnt a civil rights movement. This is something perverse that has occurred simply because shows like modern family and other mainstream media have tricked people. There is a HUGE difference between the color of your skin, and your sexual orientation.
Less than 2% of the country is gay. Less than 2%! And yet everyone is all HURRAY WE HAVE CHANGED LIVES! Everyone needs a witch to burn. Everyone wants to feel "Special" and "Unique". This was simply one way for people to fill that outlet. The good Lord only knows what they will cling to next in order to give their empty lives purpose
-------------------- Hippies and Liberals love Pope Francis, so why dont I quote him for you guys. "There is NO SALVATION outside the Catholic Church"
Edited by Almond Flour (07/03/15 07:09 PM)
|
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: luvdemshrooms]
#21894289 - 07/03/15 08:01 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Why do you keep saying I'm a bigot when my only concern is about excessive power in the Supreme Court?
Because you certainly come across as one.
The court constitutionally and correctly exercised it's responsibilities in reaching the correct decision.
All your whining and drooling won't change that. Repeal the 14th if you can.
No they did not and 4 justices and myself agree.
--------------------
|
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]
#21895619 - 07/04/15 04:55 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yes they did and it doesn't matter if you agree or not. Really, that's how far you've fallen? 4 justices and a drooler?
It's the courts job to decide whether laws are constitutional or not. The laws against gay marriage were not constitutional.
The court rightly knocked them down.
Read it yet agian, and weep some more:
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Now, before you repeat the same stupidity yet again:
The word 'marriage' doesn't have to appear in the constitution.
The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment says laws apply equally to all.
Yes, California voted it down. That was found unconstitutional.
On August 4, 2010, United States District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker declared Proposition 8 a violation of the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, a decision upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012. The case, known as Perry v. Brown in the Ninth Circuit, was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on July 31, 2012.[2] The case was granted review as Hollingsworth v. Perry on December 7, 2012 and a decision was issued on June 26, 2013.[3] The Court decided that the official sponsors of Proposition 8 did not have legal standing to appeal the district court decision when the state's public officials refused to do so.[4] The judgment of the Ninth Circuit was vacated and the case was returned to that Court with instructions to dismiss the Prop 8 sponsors' appeal. On June 28, 2013 a stay of effect was removed from the federal district court decision and same-sex marriages were able to resume. Same-sex couples married later that day.[5]
One amendment doesn't trump another amendment.
Polygamists and pedophiles can still not marry.
The government should be involved in marriage, yet they are and as such... it should have always, and now is, available to gays.
It doesn't matter if states are required to issue marriage licenses or not. Once they do, both gay and straights get them.
Gun rights should not end at state lines.
Taxes should be an equal rate for all taxpayers.
Affirmative action should go away.
There's 9 people on the court, not 5.
The court did it's job, though 4 of them did it wrong.
It did the right thing.
The only slippery slope is the dementia and bigotry you suffer from.
The bigots and homophobes lost.
Hopefully, though I doubt it, your bigotry will fade long enough for you to have enough dignity to stop. Somehow, I doubt you have enough remaining sense to do so.
-------------------- 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: Patlal]
#21895621 - 07/04/15 04:57 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said: Jesus fucking christ Zap, how many fucking times do we have to explain it to you???
At least once more it appears.
Clearly either his bigotry overwhelms his reasoning abilities or he's afraid 'the gay' will rub off on him.
-------------------- 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
|
|