Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So says the liberal or libertarian. Personally, it does affect people in an eternal perspective of religion. Or, at least, it should. As far as does it hurt anything secular? No. But, with God, all things are spiritual. So, if we are to go against his laws and commandments, all people should at least be made aware of this. And, then they can govern themselves.Bans on same sex marriage did exactly that
Not very progressive then. I thought you were progressive? You are able to change and hear all sides? Nope??? Doesn't surprise me. It wasn't over the edge. It's my right as an individual to say that to you and for you to say what you said to me. Both are Constitutionally protected.Holy shit!! We are done here! You are over the fucking edge!
LOL!!! Kennedy wasn't a wolf in sheepskin... HAHAHAHA! Ya, he fooled the President! Not all judges have stayed liberal or conservative. Many of them fooled their Presidents. Roberts is a turd as he basically judges based on which way the wind is blowing. Or, how much money he can be paid off.You can keep bleating that nonsense all you want. It does not make it true. So you know that we are a Constitutional Republic! Impressive. Now you just have to learn what that means. And Kennedy was not that liberal
What the hell are you blathering about. We are a nation of man made laws. Your God has no role it how we govern and are governed . For someone who claims to know something about Constitutional law (you don't) you sure come across as woefully ignorant of basic principles.So says the liberal or libertarian. Personally, it does affect people in an eternal perspective of religion. Or, at least, it should. As far as does it hurt anything secular? No. But, with God, all things are spiritual. So, if we are to go against his laws and commandments, all people should at least be made aware of this. And, then they can govern themselves.
Yes you have the right to say any damned thing that you want. You DO NOT have the tight to expect others to according to your religious beliefsNot very progressive then. I thought you were progressive? You are able to change and hear all sides? Nope??? Doesn't surprise me. It wasn't over the edge. It's my right as an individual to say that to you and for you to say what you said to me. Both are Constitutionally protected.
Oh thank goodness! Homosexuals being normalized, celebrated, and being allowed to be “married” will have so many benefits for society. Think of all the children they can have access to, they can adopt them, groom them, and raise them to be “transgender”. We won’t be complete as a people until every boy is wearing a dress and girls look and act like men.
You obviously don't have a clue about Constitutional law nor how federal, state and local laws come about. However, the legislative branches have yield their law making abilities now to the courts. There aren't 3 equal branches of government anymore. The power has shifted to the courts that now legislate from the bench. The SCOTUS nominee, Jackson, said today that state and federal laws can be overturned due to the 14th amendment through "Substantive" Due Process. Due Process is in the Constitution but "Substantive" is not. It's made up by Judges who wish to us their prejudicial personal influences to overturn the will of the people making laws. See, it is you that is woefully ignorant or who thirsts for power over those you hate that disagree with you and have different opinions and beliefs. The 32 states Cornyn stated were of people with traditional beliefs of what marriage has been for thousands of years. Like Cornyn, I'm not judging the merits or non-merits of same-sex marriages. Unlike you, I'm adhering to the Constitution and what is actually in the Constitution. "Substantive" is not in the Constitution and should not be used to judge the merits of any law. Only Due Process or the shift of the people as is with other states. You are a nation of power, not laws.What the hell are you blathering about. We are a nation of man made laws. Your God has no role it how we govern and are governed . For someone who claims to know something about Constitutional law (you don't) you sure come across as woefully ignorant of basic principles.
Of course I have that right too. It's in the Constitution and shall not be abridged by "Substantive" beliefs of Bible deniers. We also have our Due Process as well. Not just atheists and fake religious people like Judge Jackson who have not walked her talk. All people in the U.S. have the right to vote their conscience. Do you know what a conscience is? Religion directly influences a person's conscience. Are you suggesting that you have a right to force me to vote only your way or the highway?Yes you have the right to say any damned thing that you want. You DO NOT have the tight to expect others to according to your religious beliefs
Was the state law allowing same sex marriage in a crystal clear way in 2015? If it were, the judge ruled rightfully. If it wasn't, I'd appeal if I were her. Legislating from the bench is the poorest way to establish law and order. However, if the state legislature stated one way or another that year that same-sex marriages were disallowed, the law should dictate the rightness or wrongness of the action and nothing else. There are people in the Ukraine being mowed down by evil people. We have better things to do right now like write out a check to the Red CrossIn 2015, County Clerk Kim Davis refused to issue a gay couple a marriage license in spite of existing laws allowing same sex marriage.
A Judge has ruled that she violated their rights
It is this Court's opinion that Davis violated Plaintiffs' constitutional right to marry and the only remaining issue is the issue of damages," Bunning, who serves on the US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, wrote in a memorandum and opinion.
whose abilities are drained when we focus on petty matters that grab headlines and put one group against another in the same way it happened just before the War between the States. 
I'm asking the government to stay out of the bedroom. Why do you socialists always want the Feds involved?Who endorses marriage? Or better stated, who are YOU expecting to endorse marriage?
If the govt, then your point is ridiculous. You're not asking the govt to leave you alone; you're asking the govt to ENDORSE.
If society, then society will decide.
If the church, again the church will decide.
That's exactly what he's proposing; to shred the Constitution and institute Evangelical sharia law. Evangelicals are American's Taliban.Yes you have the right to say any damned thing that you want. You DO NOT have the tight to expect others to according to your religious beliefs
It was nationwideWas the state law allowing same sex marriage in a crystal clear way in 2015? If it were, the judge ruled rightfully. If it wasn't, I'd appeal if I were her. Legislating from the bench is the poorest way to establish law and order. However, if the state legislature stated one way or another that year that same-sex marriages were disallowed, the law should dictate the rightness or wrongness of the action and nothing else. There are people in the Ukraine being mowed down by evil people. We have better things to do right now like write out a check to the Red Cross
You can vote any way you wish for whatever reasonOf course I have that right too. It's in the Constitution and shall not be abridged by "Substantive" beliefs of Bible deniers. We also have our Due Process as well. Not just atheists and fake religious people like Judge Jackson who have not walked her talk. All people in the U.S. have the right to vote their conscience. Do you know what a conscience is? Religion directly influences a person's conscience. Are you suggesting that you have a right to force me to vote only your way or the highway?
You can vote any way you wish for whatever reason
You can’t force your religious views on others. Which is what Davis tried to do
Actually, you have it half assed backwards, RW.
It was the homos were forcing their religious beliefs in favor of Gay Marriage on Ms. Davis.
Remember it was the radical Episcopalianists who came up with the RELIGIOUS theorem that God put Adam and Steve in the Garden, not Adam and Eve as proclaimed by Christians like Davis.
The law allowed same sex marriage
Davis denied a marriage license because of her private religious views
Forced her religion on a gay couple wanting to marry
Not in the county they wanted to marryNot at all, the people could have gone to numerous other places if they wanted gay-married.
Just like I don't go to my friendly islamonazi butcher when I am shopping for kielbasi. I go elsewhere where they don't have religious problems with handling pork.
Haven't you heard? The courts now have no credibility because the democrats haven't been allowed to pack them as desired.In 2015, County Clerk Kim Davis refused to issue a gay couple a marriage license in spite of existing laws allowing same sex marriage.
A Judge has ruled that she violated their rights
It is this Court's opinion that Davis violated Plaintiffs' constitutional right to marry and the only remaining issue is the issue of damages," Bunning, who serves on the US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, wrote in a memorandum and opinion.
What in the name of the Gods and Goddesses does that mean? Some states were allowing same sex marriage then- either because they enacted it voluntarily or because they were forced to by a Federal Circuit Court. The Scotus ruled- not on what states were doing- but rather on what they must do under the ConstitutionWas the state law allowing same sex marriage in a crystal clear way in 2015? If it were, the judge ruled rightfully. If it wasn't, I'd appeal if I were her.
What in the name of the Gods and Goddesses does that mean? Some states were allowing same sex marriage then- either because they enacted it voluntarily or because they were forced to by a Federal Circuit Court. The Scotus ruled- not on what states were doing- but rather on what they must do under the Constitution
