Civil Rights - what are included?

[George Costanza]

Rights are endowed by the Creator...not by Obabble and al sharpton.

As interpreted by whom - the Christian Right?

 

[OKTexas]

Did Jefferson identify them in the Declaration of Independence? Or are they only the Rights delineated in COTUS?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

What other Rights might be among the three noted in this seminal document?

What Rights can we infer from the 9th Amendment?

Can Rights be abridged by "The People"?

No, rights cannot be abridged by the people.

Our rights are inalienable, they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable, or rights are not absolute, they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government reflecting the will of the people, consistent with the Constitution and its case law.

And when the people err and enact measures repugnant to the Constitution, those so disadvantaged are at liberty to seek relief in the Federal courts, where measures inconsistent with Constitutional jurisprudence are invalidated.

As for the Ninth Amendment:

''The language and history of the Ninth Amendment reveal that the Framers of the Constitution believed that there are additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement, which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight constitutional amendments. . . . To hold that a right so basic and fundamental and so deep-rooted in our society as the right of privacy in marriage may be infringed because that right is not guaranteed in so many words by the first eight amendments to the Constitution is to ignore the Ninth Amendment and to give it no effect whatsoever. Moreover, a judicial construction that this fundamental right is not protected by the Constitution because it is not mentioned in explicit terms by one of the first eight amendments or elsewhere in the Constitution would violate the Ninth Amendment. . . . Nor do I mean to state that the Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of right protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government. Rather, the Ninth Amendment shows a belief of the Constitution's authors that fundamental rights exist that are not expressly enumerated in the first eight amendments and an intent that the list of rights included there not be deemed exhaustive.''

Ninth Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw

This is why the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the Supreme Court, authorized by the doctrine of judicial review and Articles III and VI - “but that's not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant 'argument.'

So where does the government get the power to arbitrarily impose it's definition of marriage on the people, destroying millenniums of precedent?

From the Constitution of the United States. And it hasn't been imposed on you, has it? Or, have you been forced into a same-sex marriage?!

No I'm just forced to subsidize it with my tax money. That makes me a slave, doesn't it. The concept of SSM didn't exist anywhere in the world until 1996, and is not agreed to by the vast majority of the worlds populations. Also since the concept of marriage was a religious one, the government redefining it, also imposes itself on our various religions.

 

[OKTexas]

Where do you find this "right"?

The Right to marry?

It is a human right and I would think that is sufficient, but otherwise consult Constitutional case law. It has been upheld numerous times.

Marriage was always a religious ceremony until government insinuated itself into it.

But would you agree that marriage is a god-given right?

No, I would agree that government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Did Jefferson identify them in the Declaration of Independence? Or are they only the Rights delineated in COTUS?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

What other Rights might be among the three noted in this seminal document?

What Rights can we infer from the 9th Amendment?

Can Rights be abridged by "The People"?

No, rights cannot be abridged by the people.

Our rights are inalienable, they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable, or rights are not absolute, they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government reflecting the will of the people, consistent with the Constitution and its case law.

And when the people err and enact measures repugnant to the Constitution, those so disadvantaged are at liberty to seek relief in the Federal courts, where measures inconsistent with Constitutional jurisprudence are invalidated.

As for the Ninth Amendment:

''The language and history of the Ninth Amendment reveal that the Framers of the Constitution believed that there are additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement, which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight constitutional amendments. . . . To hold that a right so basic and fundamental and so deep-rooted in our society as the right of privacy in marriage may be infringed because that right is not guaranteed in so many words by the first eight amendments to the Constitution is to ignore the Ninth Amendment and to give it no effect whatsoever. Moreover, a judicial construction that this fundamental right is not protected by the Constitution because it is not mentioned in explicit terms by one of the first eight amendments or elsewhere in the Constitution would violate the Ninth Amendment. . . . Nor do I mean to state that the Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of right protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government. Rather, the Ninth Amendment shows a belief of the Constitution's authors that fundamental rights exist that are not expressly enumerated in the first eight amendments and an intent that the list of rights included there not be deemed exhaustive.''

Ninth Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw

This is why the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the Supreme Court, authorized by the doctrine of judicial review and Articles III and VI - “but that's not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant 'argument.'

So where does the government get the power to arbitrarily impose it's definition of marriage on the people, destroying millenniums of precedent?

From the Constitution of the United States. And it hasn't been imposed on you, has it? Or, have you been forced into a same-sex marriage?!

No I'm just forced to subsidize it with my tax money. That makes me a slave, doesn't it. The concept of SSM didn't exist anywhere in the world until 1996, and is not agreed to by the vast majority of the worlds populations. Also since the concept of marriage was a religious one, the government redefining it, also imposes itself on our various religions.

And I have to subsidize wasteful defense spending with my tax dollars. Our tax dollars are spend on things we don't like or with which we disagree. That's the price of living in a modern civilization. Deal with it, vote, lobby, run for office, sue the government, or move.

This country is a constitutional republic. The majority doesn't matter if the law is unconstitutional.

The government's definition of marriage has nothing to do with your religion, just government recognition of civil marriage. You can still get married in church in a religious ceremony and no one can force your church to perform same-sex marriages.

So, in other words, same-sex marriage is constitutional, legal and doesn't effect you really at all.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Right to marry?

It is a human right and I would think that is sufficient, but otherwise consult Constitutional case law. It has been upheld numerous times.

Marriage was always a religious ceremony until government insinuated itself into it.

But would you agree that marriage is a god-given right?

No, I would agree that government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

Marriage is involved with every single area I listed. You cannot get "government out of the marriage business" without affecting those areas as well.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

The Right to marry?

It is a human right and I would think that is sufficient, but otherwise consult Constitutional case law. It has been upheld numerous times.

Marriage was always a religious ceremony until government insinuated itself into it.

But would you agree that marriage is a god-given right?

No, I would agree that government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

We got along poorly, which is why laws were implemented.

All of those, even criminal law in cases like polygamy and fraud, are associated with civil marriage laws that protect people whose marriages have come to an end.

 

[OKTexas]

Did Jefferson identify them in the Declaration of Independence? Or are they only the Rights delineated in COTUS?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

What other Rights might be among the three noted in this seminal document?

What Rights can we infer from the 9th Amendment?

Can Rights be abridged by "The People"?

No, rights cannot be abridged by the people.

Our rights are inalienable, they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable, or rights are not absolute, they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government reflecting the will of the people, consistent with the Constitution and its case law.

And when the people err and enact measures repugnant to the Constitution, those so disadvantaged are at liberty to seek relief in the Federal courts, where measures inconsistent with Constitutional jurisprudence are invalidated.

As for the Ninth Amendment:

''The language and history of the Ninth Amendment reveal that the Framers of the Constitution believed that there are additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement, which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight constitutional amendments. . . . To hold that a right so basic and fundamental and so deep-rooted in our society as the right of privacy in marriage may be infringed because that right is not guaranteed in so many words by the first eight amendments to the Constitution is to ignore the Ninth Amendment and to give it no effect whatsoever. Moreover, a judicial construction that this fundamental right is not protected by the Constitution because it is not mentioned in explicit terms by one of the first eight amendments or elsewhere in the Constitution would violate the Ninth Amendment. . . . Nor do I mean to state that the Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of right protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government. Rather, the Ninth Amendment shows a belief of the Constitution's authors that fundamental rights exist that are not expressly enumerated in the first eight amendments and an intent that the list of rights included there not be deemed exhaustive.''

Ninth Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw

This is why the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the Supreme Court, authorized by the doctrine of judicial review and Articles III and VI - “but that's not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant 'argument.'

So where does the government get the power to arbitrarily impose it's definition of marriage on the people, destroying millenniums of precedent?

From the Constitution of the United States. And it hasn't been imposed on you, has it? Or, have you been forced into a same-sex marriage?!

No I'm just forced to subsidize it with my tax money. That makes me a slave, doesn't it. The concept of SSM didn't exist anywhere in the world until 1996, and is not agreed to by the vast majority of the worlds populations. Also since the concept of marriage was a religious one, the government redefining it, also imposes itself on our various religions.

And I have to subsidize wasteful defense spending with my tax dollars. Our tax dollars are spend on things we don't like or with which we disagree. That's the price of living in a modern civilization. Deal with it, vote, lobby, run for office, sue the government, or move.

This country is a constitutional republic. The majority doesn't matter if the law is unconstitutional.

The government's definition of marriage has nothing to do with your religion, just government recognition of civil marriage. You can still get married in church in a religious ceremony and no one can force your church to perform same-sex marriages.

So, in other words, same-sex marriage is constitutional, legal and doesn't effect you really at all.

Tell the folks that are being personally destroyed, that it doesn't really effect them at all. Also anytime government delves into areas that they have no authority in, it effects everyone. Funny it wasn't constitutional until 5 unelected judges said so this year, what new right will they invent in the future?

 

[PredFan]

Did Jefferson identify them in the Declaration of Independence? Or are they only the Rights delineated in COTUS?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

What other Rights might be among the three noted in this seminal document?

What Rights can we infer from the 9th Amendment?

Can Rights be abridged by "The People"?

"What other Rights might be among the three noted in this seminal document?"

All the rights we have are delineated in the Bill of Rights.

"What Rights can we infer from the 9th Amendment?"

None. The ninth amendment is a clarification of the Bill of Rights and restrictions on the government as to the Rights of Americans.

"Can Rights be abridged by "The People"?"

They shouldn't be, but more and more these days, the government is getting away with it.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

No, rights cannot be abridged by the people.

Our rights are inalienable, they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable, or rights are not absolute, they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government reflecting the will of the people, consistent with the Constitution and its case law.

And when the people err and enact measures repugnant to the Constitution, those so disadvantaged are at liberty to seek relief in the Federal courts, where measures inconsistent with Constitutional jurisprudence are invalidated.

As for the Ninth Amendment:

''The language and history of the Ninth Amendment reveal that the Framers of the Constitution believed that there are additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement, which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight constitutional amendments. . . . To hold that a right so basic and fundamental and so deep-rooted in our society as the right of privacy in marriage may be infringed because that right is not guaranteed in so many words by the first eight amendments to the Constitution is to ignore the Ninth Amendment and to give it no effect whatsoever. Moreover, a judicial construction that this fundamental right is not protected by the Constitution because it is not mentioned in explicit terms by one of the first eight amendments or elsewhere in the Constitution would violate the Ninth Amendment. . . . Nor do I mean to state that the Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of right protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government. Rather, the Ninth Amendment shows a belief of the Constitution's authors that fundamental rights exist that are not expressly enumerated in the first eight amendments and an intent that the list of rights included there not be deemed exhaustive.''

Ninth Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw

This is why the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the Supreme Court, authorized by the doctrine of judicial review and Articles III and VI - “but that's not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant 'argument.'

So where does the government get the power to arbitrarily impose it's definition of marriage on the people, destroying millenniums of precedent?

From the Constitution of the United States. And it hasn't been imposed on you, has it? Or, have you been forced into a same-sex marriage?!

No I'm just forced to subsidize it with my tax money. That makes me a slave, doesn't it. The concept of SSM didn't exist anywhere in the world until 1996, and is not agreed to by the vast majority of the worlds populations. Also since the concept of marriage was a religious one, the government redefining it, also imposes itself on our various religions.

And I have to subsidize wasteful defense spending with my tax dollars. Our tax dollars are spend on things we don't like or with which we disagree. That's the price of living in a modern civilization. Deal with it, vote, lobby, run for office, sue the government, or move.

This country is a constitutional republic. The majority doesn't matter if the law is unconstitutional.

The government's definition of marriage has nothing to do with your religion, just government recognition of civil marriage. You can still get married in church in a religious ceremony and no one can force your church to perform same-sex marriages.

So, in other words, same-sex marriage is constitutional, legal and doesn't effect you really at all.

Tell the folks that are being personally destroyed, that it doesn't really effect them at all. Also anytime government delves into areas that they have no authority in, it effects everyone. Funny it wasn't constitutional until 5 unelected judges said so this year, what new right will they invent in the future?

That's what happens when one breaks the law: it can ruin your life.

Government has authority to regulate marriage.

The SCOTUS is the highest authority in determining whether something is constitutional or not. They didn't invent a new right, they reinstated a right that had previously been denied: marriage.

Your arguments have no real validity or basis. But, hey, file a suit and see if any lawyer accepts the case. Good luck.

 

[OKTexas]

Marriage was always a religious ceremony until government insinuated itself into it.

But would you agree that marriage is a god-given right?

No, I would agree that government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

Marriage is involved with every single area I listed. You cannot get "government out of the marriage business" without affecting those areas as well.

No the government made that so and they can undo it anytime they chose. Just because government choses to involve itself doesn't justify it being involved. Just like them telling you can't grow something on your own land for you or your animals consumption.

 

[The Rabbi]

But would you agree that marriage is a god-given right?

No, I would agree that government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

Marriage is involved with every single area I listed. You cannot get "government out of the marriage business" without affecting those areas as well.

No the government made that so and they can undo it anytime they chose. Just because government choses to involve itself doesn't justify it being involved. Just like them telling you can't grow something on your own land for you or your animals consumption.

They could. BUt given how intertwined it is it would be very difficult.

 

[OKTexas]

So where does the government get the power to arbitrarily impose it's definition of marriage on the people, destroying millenniums of precedent?

From the Constitution of the United States. And it hasn't been imposed on you, has it? Or, have you been forced into a same-sex marriage?!

No I'm just forced to subsidize it with my tax money. That makes me a slave, doesn't it. The concept of SSM didn't exist anywhere in the world until 1996, and is not agreed to by the vast majority of the worlds populations. Also since the concept of marriage was a religious one, the government redefining it, also imposes itself on our various religions.

And I have to subsidize wasteful defense spending with my tax dollars. Our tax dollars are spend on things we don't like or with which we disagree. That's the price of living in a modern civilization. Deal with it, vote, lobby, run for office, sue the government, or move.

This country is a constitutional republic. The majority doesn't matter if the law is unconstitutional.

The government's definition of marriage has nothing to do with your religion, just government recognition of civil marriage. You can still get married in church in a religious ceremony and no one can force your church to perform same-sex marriages.

So, in other words, same-sex marriage is constitutional, legal and doesn't effect you really at all.

Tell the folks that are being personally destroyed, that it doesn't really effect them at all. Also anytime government delves into areas that they have no authority in, it effects everyone. Funny it wasn't constitutional until 5 unelected judges said so this year, what new right will they invent in the future?

That's what happens when one breaks the law: it can ruin your life.

Government has authority to regulate marriage.

The SCOTUS is the highest authority in determining whether something is constitutional or not. They didn't invent a new right, they reinstated a right that had previously been denied: marriage.

Your arguments have no real validity or basis. But, hey, file a suit and see if any lawyer accepts the case. Good luck.

Bullshit, it didn't exist anywhere throughout mans history so there was nothing to deny or reinstate, it was invented.

 

[OKTexas]

No, I would agree that government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

Marriage is involved with every single area I listed. You cannot get "government out of the marriage business" without affecting those areas as well.

No the government made that so and they can undo it anytime they chose. Just because government choses to involve itself doesn't justify it being involved. Just like them telling you can't grow something on your own land for you or your animals consumption.

They could. BUt given how intertwined it is it would be very difficult.

Rolling back government intrusions is never easy, you get them out just like they got in, one step at a time.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

From the Constitution of the United States. And it hasn't been imposed on you, has it? Or, have you been forced into a same-sex marriage?!

No I'm just forced to subsidize it with my tax money. That makes me a slave, doesn't it. The concept of SSM didn't exist anywhere in the world until 1996, and is not agreed to by the vast majority of the worlds populations. Also since the concept of marriage was a religious one, the government redefining it, also imposes itself on our various religions.

And I have to subsidize wasteful defense spending with my tax dollars. Our tax dollars are spend on things we don't like or with which we disagree. That's the price of living in a modern civilization. Deal with it, vote, lobby, run for office, sue the government, or move.

This country is a constitutional republic. The majority doesn't matter if the law is unconstitutional.

The government's definition of marriage has nothing to do with your religion, just government recognition of civil marriage. You can still get married in church in a religious ceremony and no one can force your church to perform same-sex marriages.

So, in other words, same-sex marriage is constitutional, legal and doesn't effect you really at all.

Tell the folks that are being personally destroyed, that it doesn't really effect them at all. Also anytime government delves into areas that they have no authority in, it effects everyone. Funny it wasn't constitutional until 5 unelected judges said so this year, what new right will they invent in the future?

That's what happens when one breaks the law: it can ruin your life.

Government has authority to regulate marriage.

The SCOTUS is the highest authority in determining whether something is constitutional or not. They didn't invent a new right, they reinstated a right that had previously been denied: marriage.

Your arguments have no real validity or basis. But, hey, file a suit and see if any lawyer accepts the case. Good luck.

Bullshit, it didn't exist anywhere throughout mans history so there was nothing to deny or reinstate, it was invented.

So what "right" do you think was "invented"?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

No, I would agree that government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

Marriage is involved with every single area I listed. You cannot get "government out of the marriage business" without affecting those areas as well.

No the government made that so and they can undo it anytime they chose. Just because government choses to involve itself doesn't justify it being involved. Just like them telling you can't grow something on your own land for you or your animals consumption.

They could. BUt given how intertwined it is it would be very difficult.

How would marriage, divorce, custody, alimony, real estate, marriage fraud, etc. be regulated then?

 

[OKTexas]

Marriage was always a religious ceremony until government insinuated itself into it.

But would you agree that marriage is a god-given right?

No, I would agree that government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

We got along poorly, which is why laws were implemented.

All of those, even criminal law in cases like polygamy and fraud, are associated with civil marriage laws that protect people whose marriages have come to an end.

Yep, and every time you agree to let the government organize your life you surrender your liberty. Some think that is a good thing, I simply don't. Expecting government to intervene every time life gets a bit difficult gets you what we have today, children getting criminal charges for misbehaving in school and zero tolerance policies that removes common sense from life. Exactly how far are you willing to allow them go, I say we've have more than enough.

 

[The Rabbi]

should they get the hell out of:
Custody
Alimony
Real Estate
Bankruptcy
Criminal law
as well?

Custody and alimony are also modern inventions. How ever did we survive without them? The others are legitimate functions of government.

Marriage is involved with every single area I listed. You cannot get "government out of the marriage business" without affecting those areas as well.

No the government made that so and they can undo it anytime they chose. Just because government choses to involve itself doesn't justify it being involved. Just like them telling you can't grow something on your own land for you or your animals consumption.

They could. BUt given how intertwined it is it would be very difficult.

How would marriage, divorce, custody, alimony, real estate, marriage fraud, etc. be regulated then?

Regulated the same. BUt it's a mess. Currently marital property is "tenants by the entireties" meaning each partner owns 100% of the property. In a bankruptcy the house is untouchable if both people own it but only one is filing.
My point is that "government out of marriage" would mean a major reordering of the entire legal code, which is built up on the notion of marriage.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Did Jefferson identify them in the Declaration of Independence? Or are they only the Rights delineated in COTUS?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

What other Rights might be among the three noted in this seminal document?

What Rights can we infer from the 9th Amendment?

Can Rights be abridged by "The People"?

"What other Rights might be among the three noted in this seminal document?"

All the rights we have are delineated in the Bill of Rights.

"What Rights can we infer from the 9th Amendment?"

None. The ninth amendment is a clarification of the Bill of Rights and restrictions on the government as to the Rights of Americans.

"Can Rights be abridged by "The People"?"

They shouldn't be, but more and more these days, the government is getting away with it.

Interesting. ALL of our Rights are delineated in the BoR's?!! So there is no right to vote, except those rights added in the Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment; the 15th A.; the 19th A.; the 23rd A.; the 24th A.; and the 26th A.

Sad that so many amendments needed to be added to provide the right to vote for so many citizens. Sad too that the Equal Rights Amendment was stonewalled by conservatives and never passed, allowing for women to toil in the same jobs as men and yet be paid less, and a US citizen residing in the Dist. of Columbia cannot vote for POTUS or VPOTUS even to this day.

 

[Skylar]

Did Jefferson identify them in the Declaration of Independence? Or are they only the Rights delineated in COTUS?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

What other Rights might be among the three noted in this seminal document?

What Rights can we infer from the 9th Amendment?

Can Rights be abridged by "The People"?

It depends on what you mean by 'rights'. In the age of the founders, rights were freedom from government action.

Rights today have a totally different meaning.

 

[OKTexas]

No I'm just forced to subsidize it with my tax money. That makes me a slave, doesn't it. The concept of SSM didn't exist anywhere in the world until 1996, and is not agreed to by the vast majority of the worlds populations. Also since the concept of marriage was a religious one, the government redefining it, also imposes itself on our various religions.

And I have to subsidize wasteful defense spending with my tax dollars. Our tax dollars are spend on things we don't like or with which we disagree. That's the price of living in a modern civilization. Deal with it, vote, lobby, run for office, sue the government, or move.

This country is a constitutional republic. The majority doesn't matter if the law is unconstitutional.

The government's definition of marriage has nothing to do with your religion, just government recognition of civil marriage. You can still get married in church in a religious ceremony and no one can force your church to perform same-sex marriages.

So, in other words, same-sex marriage is constitutional, legal and doesn't effect you really at all.

Tell the folks that are being personally destroyed, that it doesn't really effect them at all. Also anytime government delves into areas that they have no authority in, it effects everyone. Funny it wasn't constitutional until 5 unelected judges said so this year, what new right will they invent in the future?

That's what happens when one breaks the law: it can ruin your life.

Government has authority to regulate marriage.

The SCOTUS is the highest authority in determining whether something is constitutional or not. They didn't invent a new right, they reinstated a right that had previously been denied: marriage.

Your arguments have no real validity or basis. But, hey, file a suit and see if any lawyer accepts the case. Good luck.

Bullshit, it didn't exist anywhere throughout mans history so there was nothing to deny or reinstate, it was invented.

So what "right" do you think was "invented"?

in·vent
[inˈvent]

VERB

1. create or design (something that has not existed before); be the originator of:

Like I said earlier, SSM didn't exist anywhere in mans history, so it had to be invented, didn't it.