6th Circuit Federal Appeals Court Gives Thumb's Up to States' Choice on Gay Marriage

[Syriusly]

Well that toasts your 'usurp the means of another ' argument.

Did it?

And you felt so certain of that, that you were careful to NOT cite my ''usurp the means of another' argument.

(Again folks, recognize that the relativist has no concern for the truth, or even the demonstration that they are lying... and this is because they've no use for the truth. And that is because the truth runs counter to their subjective needs.

Now ask yourself, if you can see any negative consequences that have returned to ALL OF US, due specifically TO: the disregard for truth, by the greater collective of THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT!

It's not just this crank... its not just the collective comprised of the cranks on this board... the same behavior that we see these people demonstrating, is the behavior that Gruber admitted to... which produced the 3000 page boondoggle that has cost good, hardworking people their health insurance, their peace of mind and their trust in their government... .

What you're witnessing here is the perversion of human reasoning... and it is THE SAME perversion of human reasoning which has spent the last 6 years running this country into the ground.

It is the same perversion that sets up US Gun manufacturers for illegal sales to Drug Cartels... It is the same perversion that sets up US Ambassadors and Embassy Personnel for murder...
It is the same perversion that sets up the IRS to use its police powers against the rights of US Citizens to assemble.
It is the same perversion that IMPORTS EBOLA INTO THE US.
It is the same perversion that promotes race riots in Ferguson MO.
And it is the same perversion that demands that free people must celebrate sexual deviancy OR ELSE!)

Bat guano crazy.

all of it.

 

[Syriusly]

Well that toasts your 'usurp the means of another ' argument.

Did it?

And you felt so certain of that, that you were careful to NOT cite my ''usurp the means of another' argument.

(Again folks, recognize that the relativist has no concern for the truth, or even the demonstration that they are lying... and this is because they've no use for the truth. And that is because the truth runs counter to their subjective needs.

Now ask yourself, if you can see any negative consequences that have returned to ALL OF US, due specifically TO: the disregard for truth, by the greater collective of THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT!

It's not just this crank... its not just the collective comprised of the cranks on this board... the same behavior that we see these people demonstrating, is the behavior that Gruber admitted to... which produced the 3000 page boondoggle that has cost good, hardworking people their health insurance, their peace of mind and their trust in their government... .

What you're witnessing here is the perversion of human reasoning... and it is THE SAME perversion of human reasoning which has spent the last 6 years running this country into the ground.

It is the same perversion that sets up US Gun manufacturers for illegal sales to Drug Cartels... It is the same perversion that sets up US Ambassadors and Embassy Personnel for murder...
It is the same perversion that sets up the IRS to use its police powers against the rights of US Citizens to assemble.
It is the same perversion that IMPORTS EBOLA INTO THE US.
It is the same perversion that promotes race riots in Ferguson MO.
And it is the same perversion that demands that free people must celebrate sexual deviancy OR ELSE!)

Wow.....Ebola. Gun manufacturing. Race riots. Gruber.

But not a single mention of marriage. Why the complete abandonment of the topic of gay marriage....or marriage in any capacity?

He left out Benghazi and flouride in the water.

 

[Kosh]

Well that toasts your 'usurp the means of another ' argument.

Did it?

And you felt so certain of that, that you were careful to NOT cite my ''usurp the means of another' argument.

(Again folks, recognize that the relativist has no concern for the truth, or even the demonstration that they are lying... and this is because they've no use for the truth. And that is because the truth runs counter to their subjective needs.

Now ask yourself, if you can see any negative consequences that have returned to ALL OF US, due specifically TO: the disregard for truth, by the greater collective of THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT!

It's not just this crank... its not just the collective comprised of the cranks on this board... the same behavior that we see these people demonstrating, is the behavior that Gruber admitted to... which produced the 3000 page boondoggle that has cost good, hardworking people their health insurance, their peace of mind and their trust in their government... .

What you're witnessing here is the perversion of human reasoning... and it is THE SAME perversion of human reasoning which has spent the last 6 years running this country into the ground.

It is the same perversion that sets up US Gun manufacturers for illegal sales to Drug Cartels... It is the same perversion that sets up US Ambassadors and Embassy Personnel for murder...
It is the same perversion that sets up the IRS to use its police powers against the rights of US Citizens to assemble.
It is the same perversion that IMPORTS EBOLA INTO THE US.
It is the same perversion that promotes race riots in Ferguson MO.
And it is the same perversion that demands that free people must celebrate sexual deviancy OR ELSE!)

Bat guano crazy.

all of it.

 

[Kosh]

Well that toasts your 'usurp the means of another ' argument.

Did it?

And you felt so certain of that, that you were careful to NOT cite my ''usurp the means of another' argument.

(Again folks, recognize that the relativist has no concern for the truth, or even the demonstration that they are lying... and this is because they've no use for the truth. And that is because the truth runs counter to their subjective needs.

Now ask yourself, if you can see any negative consequences that have returned to ALL OF US, due specifically TO: the disregard for truth, by the greater collective of THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT!

It's not just this crank... its not just the collective comprised of the cranks on this board... the same behavior that we see these people demonstrating, is the behavior that Gruber admitted to... which produced the 3000 page boondoggle that has cost good, hardworking people their health insurance, their peace of mind and their trust in their government... .

What you're witnessing here is the perversion of human reasoning... and it is THE SAME perversion of human reasoning which has spent the last 6 years running this country into the ground.

It is the same perversion that sets up US Gun manufacturers for illegal sales to Drug Cartels... It is the same perversion that sets up US Ambassadors and Embassy Personnel for murder...
It is the same perversion that sets up the IRS to use its police powers against the rights of US Citizens to assemble.
It is the same perversion that IMPORTS EBOLA INTO THE US.
It is the same perversion that promotes race riots in Ferguson MO.
And it is the same perversion that demands that free people must celebrate sexual deviancy OR ELSE!)

Wow.....Ebola. Gun manufacturing. Race riots. Gruber.

But not a single mention of marriage. Why the complete abandonment of the topic of gay marriage....or marriage in any capacity?

He left out Benghazi and flouride in the water.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Wow.....Ebola. Gun manufacturing. Race riots. Gruber.

Notice how the relativist had no concern for the deceit intrinsic to "Ebola, Fast and Furious, the Ferguson Race Riots and Gruber's confessions that obamacare was based entirely upon lies"; which is no concern that their government, failed to be truthful.

And what was my position?

"Relativists have no concern for truth...as truth does not serve their subjective needs."

LOL! ... yup.

And of course: Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

I'm having a discussion about gay marriage. Not ebola. Or gun manufacturers. Or race riots. Or any of the red herrings you're tossing up.

When you're ready to rejoin the conversation, feel free. But if all you've got is spamming the same reply regardless of what is said, then you're done.

You're not discussing anything. You're here to plow insipid Leftist anti-intellectual boilerplate, as a means to attack the soundly reasoned principle that has sustain the viability of the United States for nearly two and a half centuries... .

The deceitful species of reasoning you're advancing is the same obtuse fraudulence that was used in Fast and Furious, The IRS attack upon Americans, Benghazi, the import of Ebola into United States and the fomenting of race riots in Ferguson. You're manifestly evil Skylar... meaning that you're a bad person, here to deceive people, to harm others... .

Do you feel that there's a right to harm other Skylar?

If so, how so?

If not, why not?

 

[WorldWatcher]

MIght want to do some research on the SCOTUS. There are two ways that a SCOTUS precedent becomes inactive. One the SCOTUS directly setting aside a prior judge. The second is doctrinal changes that render a prior ruling inapplicable anymore. As noted in the Circuit Court rulings by the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th Circuit Courts - that while the SCOTUS has not directly set aside Baker (from 1971) there have been a number of doctrinal changes that have occured which have changed the legal landscape... If it was as you said, all the court need to do was accept the case, reiterate the Baker position - and this would be all done with. But they didn't, they let the Circuit Court ruling stand.

Judge Sutton did some research...did they let Sutton's ruling recently stand?

They have neither allowed Sutton's ruling to stand or overruled the ruling. You really have no concept of how the court works do you?

In the cases from the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th Circuits the bans were ruled unconstitutional by the Circuit Courts. Those supporting keeping the bans in place then had to request a stay from the next higher court (i.e. the SCOTUS) to prevent SSCM's from starting. The SCOTUS refused in every case to issue the stay and so SSCM's could start in those states as the Circuit Court rulings went into effect. Then they rejected the appeals form those trying to keep the bans in place. When they rejected the appeals, then "they let the ruling stand".

In cases in the 6th Circuit the bans were upheld and pending appeal no stay is needed. At this point THERE HAS BEEN NO ACTION by the SCOTUS on the case from the 6th Circuit Court's jurisdiction. The cases are being appealed (writ's being received just in the last week). Because of the split between the 10th, 9th, 7th, 4th and with only the decent coming from the 6th the SCOTUS has very little choice but to accept an appeal for review. During that period SSCM's will continue in the states under the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th and not be allowed in the 6th pending the SCOTUS final ruling - probably in late June of 2015.

*****************************

Here is a very simply idea to try to keep straight Sil, the SCOTUS doesn't "let a ruling stand" until either: (A) they reject an appeal (which they did with the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th's cases), or (b) they accept a case for review, hold oral arguments and obtain all the briefs, and then issue a final decision (none of which has happened with the cases from the 6th Circuit yet.)

Stays neither "let a ruling stand" or "overturn a ruling" - stays are simply a pause to allow the process to continue.




>>>>

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well that toasts your 'usurp the means of another ' argument.

Did it?

And you felt so certain of that, that you were careful to NOT cite my ''usurp the means of another' argument.

(Again folks, recognize that the relativist has no concern for the truth, or even the demonstration that they are lying... and this is because they've no use for the truth. And that is because the truth runs counter to their subjective needs.

Now ask yourself, if you can see any negative consequences that have returned to ALL OF US, due specifically TO: the disregard for truth, by the greater collective of THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT!

It's not just this crank... its not just the collective comprised of the cranks on this board... the same behavior that we see these people demonstrating, is the behavior that Gruber admitted to... which produced the 3000 page boondoggle that has cost good, hardworking people their health insurance, their peace of mind and their trust in their government... .

What you're witnessing here is the perversion of human reasoning... and it is THE SAME perversion of human reasoning which has spent the last 6 years running this country into the ground.

It is the same perversion that sets up US Gun manufacturers for illegal sales to Drug Cartels... It is the same perversion that sets up US Ambassadors and Embassy Personnel for murder...
It is the same perversion that sets up the IRS to use its police powers against the rights of US Citizens to assemble.
It is the same perversion that IMPORTS EBOLA INTO THE US.
It is the same perversion that promotes race riots in Ferguson MO.
And it is the same perversion that demands that free people must celebrate sexual deviancy OR ELSE!)

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Wow.....Ebola. Gun manufacturing. Race riots. IRS. Gruber. ... no mention of Marriage.

Notice how the relativist had no concern for the deceit intrinsic to "Ebola, Fast and Furious, the Ferguson Race Riots, The Executive se of the IRS to prevent innocent citizens from peacably assembling and Gruber's confessions that obamacare was based entirely upon lies"; which is no concern that their government, failed to be truthful.

And what was my position?

"Relativists have no concern for truth...as truth does not serve their subjective needs."

LOL! ... yup.

And of course: Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

 

[Skylar]

In cases in the 6th Circuit the bans were upheld and pending appeal no stay is needed. At this point THERE HAS BEEN NO ACTION by the SCOTUS. The cases are being appealed (writ's being received just in the last week). Because of the split between the 10th, 9th, 7th, 4th and with only the decent coming from the 6th the SCOTUS has very little choice but to accept an appeal for review. During that period SSCM's will continue in the states under the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th and not be allowed in the 6th pending the SCOTUS final ruling - probably in late June of 2015.

The full quorum of the 6th could still rule in favor of gay marriage. But it looks like the proponents of gay marriage are skipping the quorum and going directly to the Supreme Court to force them to rule on the topic.

And the court seems poised to rule in favor of gay marriage....but *at least* 5 to 4. I suspect it will be 6 to 3 or perhaps even 7 to 2. No one wants to be remembered as this generation's Leon Bazile.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

MIght want to do some research on the SCOTUS. There are two ways that a SCOTUS precedent becomes inactive. One the SCOTUS directly setting aside a prior judge. The second is doctrinal changes that render a prior ruling inapplicable anymore. As noted in the Circuit Court rulings by the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th Circuit Courts - that while the SCOTUS has not directly set aside Baker (from 1971) there have been a number of doctrinal changes that have occured which have changed the legal landscape... If it was as you said, all the court need to do was accept the case, reiterate the Baker position - and this would be all done with. But they didn't, they let the Circuit Court ruling stand.

Judge Sutton did some research...did they let Sutton's ruling recently stand?

They have neither allowed Sutton's ruling to stand or overruled the ruling. You really have no concept of how the court works do you?

In the cases from the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th Circuits the bans were ruled unconstitutional. Those supporting keeping the bans in place then had to request a stay from the next higher court (i.e. the SCOTUS) to prevent SSCM's from starting. The SCOTUS refused in every case to issue the stay and so SSCM's could start in those states as the Circuit Court rulings went into effect.

In cases in the 6th Circuit the bans were upheld and pending appeal no stay is needed. At this point THERE HAS BEEN NO ACTION by the SCOTUS. The cases are being appealed (writ's being received just in the last week). Because of the split between the 10th, 9th, 7th, 4th and with only the decent coming from the 6th the SCOTUS has very little choice but to accept an appeal for review. During that period SSCM's will continue in the states under the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th and not be allowed in the 6th pending the SCOTUS final ruling - probably in late June of 2015.

*****************************

Here is a very simply idea to try to keep straight Sil, the SCOTUS doesn't "let a ruling stand" until either: (A) they reject an appeal (which they did with the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th's cases), or (b) they accept a case for review, hold oral arguments and obtain all the briefs, and then issue a final decision (none of which has happened with the cases from the 6th Circuit yet.)

Stays neither "let a ruling stand" or "overturn a ruling" - stays are simply a pause to allow the process to continue.




>>>>

The SCOTUS isn't going to here the case until there is an executive administration in place which will execute based upon their decision.

So... you can relax until early to mid 2016. At which time... Mom and Dad will walk in the door and the Gay party will be OVER!

 

[Skylar]

You're not discussing anything.

Sure I am. I'm asking you why a man and a man can't get married. And you have no reason. You speak of 'nature designing marriage', but you can't point to a single thing that a man and a woman bring to marriage that a man and a man don't. Remembering, of course, that you've removed procreation as the sole purpose of marriage.

You're here to plow insipid Leftist anti-intellectual boilerplate, as a means to attack the soundly reasoned principle that has sustain the viability of the United States for nearly two and a half centuries... .

If you can't handle disagreement, this really isn't the arena for you. And if your claims have huge logical and rational holes in them, expect to be called on them. You've cited procreation as the purpose of marriage. But I've demonstrated irrefutably that there is a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children or the ability to have them with infertile and childless couples who are married. Debunking your claim of procreation as an exclusive purpose.

As there are purposes of marriage that have nothing to do with procreation, why then would two men not be allowed to join the union?

You can't say. And if you want to deny a fundamental right, you're going to need a very, very good reason which you simply don't have.

The deceitful species of reasoning you're advancing is the same obtuse fraudulence that was used in Fast and Furious, The IRS attack upon Americans, Benghazi, the import of Ebola into United States and the fomenting of race riots in Ferguson. You're manifestly evil Skylar... meaning that you're a bad person, here to deceive people, to harm others... .

And the red herring fest begins anew. You seem desperate to change topics. If your claims had merit, you wouldn't need to flee.

Do you feel that there's a right to harm other Skylar?

What harm are you referring to? You couldn't cite any restriction on your ability to get married if a gay person is allowed to marry. So you'll need to be a little more specific on what you mean by 'harm'.

 

[Skylar]

The SCOTUS isn't going to here the case until there is an executive administration in place which will execute based upon their decision.

So... you can relax until early to mid 2016. At which time... Mom and Dad will walk in the door and the Gay party will be OVER!

Says who? Can you quote the judiciary saying this? And who says that there isn't an executive administration in place that will not execute based on their decision?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You're not discussing anything.

Sure I am. I'm asking you why a man and a man can't get married. And you have no reason.

Sure I do... Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman. Which is the same reason you've ben given hundreds of times. You simply pretend that you haven't been given the reason, because you have no concern for the truth, because the truth does not serve your subjective, personal needs.

Because... you're manifestly evil; because you're a bad, perverse, illegitimate person.

 

[Skylar]

You're not discussing anything.

Sure I am. I'm asking you why a man and a man can't get married. And you have no reason.

Sure I do... Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

But why? Your argument is marriage is the joining of one man and one woman because marriage is the joining of one man and one woman. Your evidence and your conclusion are the exact same thing. That's a circular argument.

Why is marriage only a man and woman? Why can't it be a man and a man? Or a woman and a woman?

You have no reason save circular reason. Which doesn't provide with a reason. Merely a declarative statement backed by the same declarative statement.

 

[WorldWatcher]

In cases in the 6th Circuit the bans were upheld and pending appeal no stay is needed. At this point THERE HAS BEEN NO ACTION by the SCOTUS. The cases are being appealed (writ's being received just in the last week). Because of the split between the 10th, 9th, 7th, 4th and with only the decent coming from the 6th the SCOTUS has very little choice but to accept an appeal for review. During that period SSCM's will continue in the states under the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th and not be allowed in the 6th pending the SCOTUS final ruling - probably in late June of 2015.

The full quorum of the 6th could still rule in favor of gay marriage. But it looks like the proponents of gay marriage are skipping the quorum and going directly to the Supreme Court to force them to rule on the topic.

And the court seems poised to rule in favor of gay marriage....but *at least* 5 to 4. I suspect it will be 6 to 3 or perhaps even 7 to 2. No one wants to be remembered as this generation's Leon Bazile.

They aren't requesting an en banc review from the 6th. Appeals are going straight to the SCOTUS. That being a tactical decision (IMHO) to ensure the case made it to the SCOTUS in time to be heard this term. If a request had been made of the en banc review, that would have delayed things for months. Then there would have been the 90 day appeal window, another month for responses by the state. That would have put the case well past January which is typically considered the cutoff to getting a case heard in the current term so the cases would have rolled to the new term starting October 2015 with a decision in 2016.

I think Breyer, Kagen, Sotomayor, and Ginsberg will vote to uphold equal protection under the law. Scalia, Thomas and Alito will vote to uphold the discriminatory bans. That just leaves Kennedy and Roberts. I'd give Kennedy the odds of 70/30 to recognize that there is no compelling government interest in discriminating against same-sex couples. Robert's I don't have a good read on but he's the only other possible vote in my eyes. That makes 5/4 or 6/3, I don't see a snowballs chance in hell of it being 7/2.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

The SCOTUS isn't going to here the case until there is an executive administration in place which will execute based upon their decision.

So... you can relax until early to mid 2016. At which time... Mom and Dad will walk in the door and the Gay party will be OVER!

The appeals are already arriving at the SCOTUS for THIS TERM (October 2014-June 2015).

I have no idea what your "an executive administration in place which will execute based upon their decision." even means. The SCOTUS already rejected appeals based on Circuit Court decisions from the 10th, 9th, 7th, and 4th Circuit Courts which found such bans are unconstitutional. That means in those jurisdictions the bans where struck down and the "executive administration" in those states have implemented SSCM just fine.

If you are talking "executive administration" as in the White House, even if we do win it (yes Virginia, I'm a Republican), the new President doesn't take office until January 2016 and can then only influence the court by nominating a replacement if one of the Justices passes away or steps down to retire. By mid-2016, the SCOTUS decision on the issue made in mid-2015 will already be a year old.


>>>>

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

For political reasons many on both sides of the issue would like to have a ruling on or before June 30, 2015, as to be resolved well before the advent of the 2016 primary season.

 

[Skylar]

I think Breyer, Kagen, Sotomayor, and Ginsberg will vote to uphold equal protection under the law. Scalia, Thomas and Alito will vote to uphold the discriminatory bans. That just leaves Kennedy and Roberts. I'd give Kennedy the odds of 70/30 to recognize that there is no compelling government interest in discriminating against same-sex couples. Robert's I don't have a good read on but he's the only other possible vote in my eyes. That makes 5/4 or 6/3, I don't see a snowballs chance in hell of it being 7/2.

The lifting of the most recent stay on gay marriage was a 7 to 2 decision. With only Scalia and Thomas voting against it. That gives our snowball at least a fighting chance, I'd say.

I wouldn't consider it likely. But I'd consider it within the realm of possibility.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

That just leaves Kennedy and Roberts. I'd give Kennedy the odds of 70/30 to recognize that there is no compelling government interest in discriminating against same-sex couples.

There is substantial interests in the people discriminating against the sexually abnormal and, that interest is that the entire advocacy to normalize sexual abnormality rests in deceit and specifically in fraudulent science.

The science which determined that homosexuality is not a mental disorder is absurd on its face. In truth, homosexuality is a perversion of human reasoning, which manifests itself in sociopathy, as the history of the advancement of the normalization has presented.

To allow the perverse reasoning to become culturally normalized is to subject the culture to the certain ramifications of faulty, disordered reasoning. Not the least of which is presented in the attempt by the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality to illicitly use the police powers of the state to ruin innocent people; effectively usurping the means of those innocents to freely exercise their religion. This presents dire sociopathy, which brought personal tragedy and hardship to people who merely refused to provide their services in the celebration of demonstrably deviant behavior.

To decide in favor of such not only serves to promote injustice, it serves to ENCOURAGE a deviant reasoning which runs counter to the laws of nature, the long standing traditions of the people of the United States and the moral foundation of the very concept of America itself.

This is all very basic stuff... the only way that the court decides in favor of such is where the court itself is already infected with such reasoning and where that should turn out to be the case, the United States, as it was constituted, would be over and that... THAT would be BAD!

 

[Skylar]

d give Kennedy the odds of 70/30 to recognize that there is no compelling government interest in discriminating against same-sex couples.

I'd give Kennedy more like 80 to 20 if not higher. The author of Lawerence, Romer AND Windsor, striking down sodomy laws in the first, protecting gay rights in the second, and striking down DOMA's anti-gay provisions in the third? No justice has written more relevant and more frequently the decisions that protect gays and lesbians than Kennedy.

"We come in too soon and too broad, we terminate" the democratic debate, Justice Kennedy said. On the other hand, he said, "suppose you have a person with an injury, a person is hurting. He comes to court seeking relief." The court could say, "You go away for 10 years, then I'll see you," Justice Kennedy said. "That would be maybe better for the court," but the individual might be denied his or her rights in the interim.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304500404579125862192123886

Kennedy immediately connects the gay marriage debate to harm and injury. He's clearly reluctant to rule so quickly....but I think its just as clear that he recognizes an injury.