Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Civil Rights > Gay and Lesbian Rights

Gay and Lesbian Rights Gay and Lesbian Political Rights Forum - For topics and discussions about LGBT


Thanks Tree35Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 21st, 2015, 07:23 PM   #91
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 17,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beasty View Post
You're as hopeless as LongWinded. I'm saddened that I have to share this earth with either of you to be honest.
You don't. Avail your ignorant self of any means which is necessary for you to leave. I'll pray for you.
caconservative is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 07:35 PM   #92
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 17,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Again, for the umpteenth time, name the special privileges. Or are you going to deflect, dodge and deny again?
The Court, gave Gay's the right to marry. Taking it out of the hands of the states. Where it has traditionally been, and should have stayed. A special privilege granted to a group not large enough to qualify as a recognized minority.
I personally don't care one way or the other about Gay marriage but, what I do care about is the manner in which they did it. If they can make the 10th amendment null and void, they can use the same UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER to attack the rest of the Bill of Rights. To a higher-degree, this was about more government power than Gay marriage. And it's that usurpation of UNCONSTUTIONAL POWER that should bother everyone.
caconservative is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 07:38 PM   #93
Senior Member
 
Hollywood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Memphis, Tn.
Posts: 20,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
The Court, gave Gay's the right to marry. Taking it out of the hands of the states. Where it has traditionally been, and should have stayed. A special privilege granted to a group not large enough to qualify as a recognized minority.
I personally don't care one way or the other about Gay marriage but, what I do care about is the manner in which they did it. If they can make the 10th amendment null and void, they can use the same UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER to attack the rest of the Bill of Rights. To a higher-degree, this was about more about government power than Gay marriage. And it's that usurpation of UNCONSTUTIONAL POWER that should bother everyone.
So what? Are you not equally free to marry who you want to? So exactly what "special privilege" are you talking about?
Bullshit, you do carry and very much.
Hollywood is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 07:45 PM   #94
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 27,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
The Court, gave Gay's the right to marry. Taking it out of the hands of the states. Where it has traditionally been, and should have stayed. A special privilege granted to a group not large enough to qualify as a recognized minority.
I personally don't care one way or the other about Gay marriage but, what I do care about is the manner in which they did it. If they can make the 10th amendment null and void, they can use the same UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER to attack the rest of the Bill of Rights. To a higher-degree, this was about more government power than Gay marriage. And it's that usurpation of UNCONSTUTIONAL POWER that should bother everyone.
Well, you'd better get started on some serious politicking in order to get more of your constitution changed, like the purpose of the SC and a few other clauses and amendments because as it is, by definition, the SC did not act unconstitutionally.

Meanwhile, that is still not a special privilege given to the gays. It is the method given, not the right that you are objecting to.

Last edited by RNG; August 21st, 2015 at 07:49 PM.
RNG is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 08:04 PM   #95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 17,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Well, you'd better get started on some serious politicking in order to get more of your constitution changed, like the purpose of the SC and a few other clauses and amendments because as it is, by definition, the SC did not act unconstitutionally.

Meanwhile, that is still not a special privilege given to the gays. It is the method given, not the right that you are objecting to.
Yes, the method in which the Court usurped power. This was a states-rights issue. If the electorate in my state voted for Gay marriage, I'm fine with that. When the SC took this out of the hands of sovereign states, the Court overstepped it's authority. There is not one shred of evidence found in the Constitution that allows the SC to assume power not granted by the states.
caconservative is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 08:09 PM   #96
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 17,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood View Post
So what? Are you not equally free to marry who you want to? So exactly what "special privilege" are you talking about?
Bullshit, you do carry and very much.
I only care about the corrupt way in which the Court assumed power not granted them anywhere in the Constitution. I have a Gay stepbrother who is married to another man. He's happy, and I'm happy for him. But that takes nothing away from the corrupt way the Court superseded state sovereignty.
caconservative is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 08:30 PM   #97
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 27,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
Yes, the method in which the Court usurped power. This was a states-rights issue. If the electorate in my state voted for Gay marriage, I'm fine with that. When the SC took this out of the hands of sovereign states, the Court overstepped it's authority. There is not one shred of evidence found in the Constitution that allows the SC to assume power not granted by the states.
Other than it appears to me, the body that the constitution empowered to evaluate the constitutionality of laws and in the process interpret how the constitution is to be interpreted are doing so in this case exactly as the constitution intended. They did not overstep their authority.
RNG is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 08:30 PM   #98
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 27,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
I only care about the corrupt way in which the Court assumed power not granted them anywhere in the Constitution. I have a Gay stepbrother who is married to another man. He's happy, and I'm happy for him. But that takes nothing away from the corrupt way the Court superseded state sovereignty.
It was not corrupt.
RNG is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 09:41 PM   #99
Banned
 
coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: nunya
Posts: 12,580
Hate crime laws are the only "special privileges" given to one group and not another. Oh, then there is the time tested affirmative action, used to give people an advantage based on everything from skin color to gender. Actually CA, sorry to say you picked a bad example of unjust privileges.
coke is offline  
Old August 21st, 2015, 10:41 PM   #100
Banned
 
Beasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
You don't. Avail your ignorant self of any means which is necessary for you to leave. I'll pray for you.
Yeah, you're croaking before I am buddy, so don't hold your breath.

Then again, a mouth breather like you wouldn't be able to talk holding his breath, so on second thought go for it.
Beasty is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Civil Rights > Gay and Lesbian Rights

Tags
consequences, men, sex, social, straight, white



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
White House Fires Warning Shot At Republicans On Social Security LongWinded Current Events 16 March 21st, 2015 08:39 PM
Unintended Consequences Again RNG Current Events 3 November 7th, 2014 02:34 PM
White House Report: Missed Opportunities and the Consequences of State Decisions Not The White House The White House 0 July 2nd, 2014 07:10 AM
A New White House Social Secretary, And A New First npr Current Events 0 March 4th, 2011 01:32 PM
Consider potential consequences Rod Politicians 18 October 25th, 2008 06:56 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.