Alabama fights for freedom

Says you. The USSC has found that marriage is a right.

For all races to marry man/woman, yes. I know. But the structure of the word "marriage" ...it hasn't found that special behavior/lifestyle groups get to dismantle that base structure. Important because the word "marriage" is about the environment children are to be raised in..

http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf

Teens without parent role model are 67 per cent less likely to get a job Daily Mail Online

No one is dismantling anything. The definition of marriage has been expanded to include same sex couples. But no one has lost anything. The base structure is still the same as it was. No change in any straight person's marriage at all.
 
Says you. The USSC has found that marriage is a right.

For all races to marry man/woman, yes.

Actually, the court offered no specific caveats. You're again inventing restrictions that the court never has.

And as Winter has noted, all hetero marriages are still recognized the day after gay marriage recognition as they were the day before. They're completely unaffected. So your 'dismantled' argument is nonsense.
 
We don't vote on Civil Rights. That is the job of our courts.
Forcing the subsidization of buttfucking or muff diving is not a civil right.
Equal protection of the law is.
Homos already have the equal protection of marrying someone of the opposite gender just as heteros do. Your tired equality non-argument is baseless.

Homo Sapiens should all have equal protection.

Homosexuals are in court, winning, showing that they have not been treated equally before the law.
 
The only oppression here is the judiciary oppressing a sovereign people.

So, by recognizing the rights of individuals, the judiciary is oppressing them?
Marriage isn't a right in the Constitution. Neither is driving. Both are licensed institutions regulated by the public for the good of the public safety.

Marriage however is a right- no matter how much you want to pretend otherwise.

Loving v Virginia

"The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men."

"Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very existence and survival."

Zablocki v. Rehail

AlthoughLovingarose in the context of racial discrimination, prior and subsequent decisions of this Court confirm that the right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.

Maynard v. Hill,125 U. S. 190(1888), the Court characterized marriage as "the most important relation in life,"id.at125 U. S. 205, and as "the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress,"

InMeyer v. Nebraska,262 U. S. 390(1923), the Court recognized that the right "to marry, establish a home and bring up children" is a central part of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause,

InGriswold v. Connecticut,381 U. S. 479(1965), the Court observed:

"We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights -- older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions."

Carey v. Population Services International,431 U. S. 678(1977)

"While the outer limits of [the right of personal privacy] have not been marked by the Court, it is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions 'relating to marriage,

Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur

"This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment"
 
only 32% of Alabama supports gay marriage.
41 counties are currently defying the unconstitutional order handed down from the Federal government and refusing to issue homosexual marriage licenses.
an Alabama judge said yesterday he will not issue homosexual marriage licenses but today said he will.
he says "the dust has settled" and soon the federal government (probably the Supreme Court) will legalize gay marriage nation wide.
folks, everyone in America didn't wake up on the same day and decide to legalize gay marriage.
this is another clear cut case of how a few anti-democratic government leaders are forcing policy on the American public

Alabama would still have segregation if we let them
Proof? Link?

I heard the judge ruled that "everyone has a right to chose a mate". LIBTARDS are hoping he meant that goats are included.

So you are already have an eye on your goat?
 
Homo Sapiens should all have equal protection.

Homosexuals are in court, winning, showing that they have not been treated equally before the law.

Yes, they are a VERY aggressive lot for claiming to be "downtrodden"... a de facto militant litigious army. Their lawsuits appear contrived and coordinated.

...meanwhile children, the most important people in the marriage contract (see family court rulings) who cannot vote and who cannot speak in this debate legally, will be deprived of the complimentary gender (and vital role model) in their "parents" 100% of the time in "gay marriages".

http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf

Teens without parent role model are 67 per cent less likely to get a job Daily Mail Online
 
Homo Sapiens should all have equal protection.

Homosexuals are in court, winning, showing that they have not been treated equally before the law.

Yes, they are a VERY aggressive lot for claiming to be "downtrodden"... a de facto militant litigious army. Their lawsuits appear contrived and coordinated.

To you perhaps. And you have no idea what you're talking about.

...meanwhile children, the most important people in the marriage contract (see family court rulings) who cannot vote and who cannot speak in this debate legally, will be deprived of the complimentary gender (and vital role model) in their "parents" 100% of the time in "gay marriages".

The Prince Trust study never even mentions same sex marriage. Let alone measures anything about parenting. All the babble you offer us about children in same sex households is you citing yourself. See above about how you don't know what you're talking about.

Worse, your entire premise is irrelevant. As denying marriage to the same sex parents of children doesn't mean the child gets opposite sex parents. It only guarantees that the child will never have married parents.

Which helps no one.
 
Once again the south must stand up to federal tyranny...in the end the feds will use excessive force and piss off more of the citizenry and in the end it will be in the south more than likely the appalachians where 2nd American Revolution starts...pretty easy to defeat the American Military hell little asians in pajamas and ak 47's did it. Iraqi freedom fighters did it...
Once again the south must stand up

and get their asses kicked in again
 
Once again the south must stand up to federal tyranny...in the end the feds will use excessive force and piss off more of the citizenry and in the end it will be in the south more than likely the appalachians where 2nd American Revolution starts...pretty easy to defeat the American Military hell little asians in pajamas and ak 47's did it. Iraqi freedom fighters did it...
Once again the south must stand up

and get their asses kicked in again
All part of the bigger plan..Just like Wallace knew negro's were going to be forced on his states educational systems Moore knows faggots are gonna be allowed to pervert the true meaning of marriage...but him standing up against federal tyranny shows the people not everyone is ready to roll over and let the nation get raped.
 

Forum List

Back
Top