DOMA ruled unconstitutional

[bigrebnc1775]

I already answered this. Asking the question over and over does not change the answer.

No, as of yet the SCOTUS has not ruled on same-sex marriage. But with this latest federal court ruling, it is only a matter of time until it does.

The only answer acceptable is yes or no.

Are you retarded?

Are you retarded for asking a retarded question?

 

[WinterBorn]

Me that's who. Why must you add to something when it's not asked of you? When you do that you are trying to deflect from something else.

As soon as you own the forum and get to make the rules, let me know. Then you get to decide how everyone answers.

Until then, people are free to answer as they choose. Let me know if you see anything inaccurate about my answers.

As long as we have a discussion that is how I will be. I will keep asking you the same thing over and over until you either answer thew question or crawl away.

And I will continue to answer as I see fit. For some reason you think your questions should only be answered the way you want.

Maybe it would be easier for you if you found someone who would answer the questions in the manner you want, or even give the exact answers you want. That way you don't have to bother with those pesky facts.

 

[Ravi]

The only answer acceptable is yes or no.

Are you retarded?

Are you retarded for asking a retarded question?

It was a serious question. I can't think of any other reason for your posting style.

So, yes or no, are you retarded?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Are you retarded?

Are you retarded for asking a retarded question?

It was a serious question. I can't think of any other reason for your posting style.

So, yes or no, are you retarded?

I really was being serious when I asked you
To answer your question no I am not retarded. But I think you are.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As soon as you own the forum and get to make the rules, let me know. Then you get to decide how everyone answers.

Until then, people are free to answer as they choose. Let me know if you see anything inaccurate about my answers.

As long as we have a discussion that is how I will be. I will keep asking you the same thing over and over until you either answer thew question or crawl away.

And I will continue to answer as I see fit. For some reason you think your questions should only be answered the way you want.

Maybe it would be easier for you if you found someone who would answer the questions in the manner you want, or even give the exact answers you want. That way you don't have to bother with those pesky facts.

That's how discussions get derailed.

 

[WinterBorn]

As long as we have a discussion that is how I will be. I will keep asking you the same thing over and over until you either answer thew question or crawl away.

And I will continue to answer as I see fit. For some reason you think your questions should only be answered the way you want.

Maybe it would be easier for you if you found someone who would answer the questions in the manner you want, or even give the exact answers you want. That way you don't have to bother with those pesky facts.

That's how discussions get derailed.

So allowing other people to give full answers to your questions is derailling?

lol

No, you want yes or no answers to questions that you already know the answer to because that way you think you are scoring some points in the debate.

 

[WinterBorn]

BOSTON — An appeals court ruled Thursday that a law that denies a host of federal benefits to gay married couples is unconstitutional.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston said the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, discriminates against gay couples.

The law was passed in 1996 at a time when it appeared Hawaii would legalize gay marriage. Since then, many states have instituted their own bans on gay marriage, while eight states have approved it, led by Massachusetts in 2004



Boston court: Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional - BostonHerald.com

i guess the judges forgot to read the bible.

Just thought I woulod remind bigrednc of the OP and the topic. The fact that a US Circuit Court ruled on DOMA is what started this. The next step is SCOTUS.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

BOSTON — An appeals court ruled Thursday that a law that denies a host of federal benefits to gay married couples is unconstitutional.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston said the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, discriminates against gay couples.

The law was passed in 1996 at a time when it appeared Hawaii would legalize gay marriage. Since then, many states have instituted their own bans on gay marriage, while eight states have approved it, led by Massachusetts in 2004



Boston court: Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional - BostonHerald.com

i guess the judges forgot to read the bible.

Just thought I woulod remind bigrednc of the OP and the topic. The fact that a US Circuit Court ruled on DOMA is what started this. The next step is SCOTUS.

And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws.
I will add that any state that recognized gay married the doma should not restrict that state . But any state that does not recognize same sex marriages they should not be force to do that.

 

[WinterBorn]

BOSTON — An appeals court ruled Thursday that a law that denies a host of federal benefits to gay married couples is unconstitutional.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston said the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, discriminates against gay couples.

The law was passed in 1996 at a time when it appeared Hawaii would legalize gay marriage. Since then, many states have instituted their own bans on gay marriage, while eight states have approved it, led by Massachusetts in 2004



Boston court: Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional - BostonHerald.com

i guess the judges forgot to read the bible.

Just thought I woulod remind bigrednc of the OP and the topic. The fact that a US Circuit Court ruled on DOMA is what started this. The next step is SCOTUS.

And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws.
I will add that any state that recognized gay married the doma should not restrict that state . But any state that does not recognize same sex marriages they should not be force to do that.

The first step is to get gay marriages recognized by the federal gov't.

Then we work on the individual states that do not allow it. Equality is coming.

 

[WinterBorn]

BOSTON — An appeals court ruled Thursday that a law that denies a host of federal benefits to gay married couples is unconstitutional.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston said the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, discriminates against gay couples.

The law was passed in 1996 at a time when it appeared Hawaii would legalize gay marriage. Since then, many states have instituted their own bans on gay marriage, while eight states have approved it, led by Massachusetts in 2004



Boston court: Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional - BostonHerald.com

i guess the judges forgot to read the bible.

Just thought I woulod remind bigrednc of the OP and the topic. The fact that a US Circuit Court ruled on DOMA is what started this. The next step is SCOTUS.

And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws.
I will add that any state that recognized gay married the doma should not restrict that state . But any state that does not recognize same sex marriages they should not be force to do that.

And just for your continued education, the court that made teh ruling was not a lower court in Mass. It was a federal appeals court. One step below the US Supreme Court.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Just thought I woulod remind bigrednc of the OP and the topic. The fact that a US Circuit Court ruled on DOMA is what started this. The next step is SCOTUS.

And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws.
I will add that any state that recognized gay married the doma should not restrict that state . But any state that does not recognize same sex marriages they should not be force to do that.

And just for your continued education, the court that made teh ruling was not a lower court in Mass. It was a federal appeals court. One step below the US Supreme Court.

Continued education? You must first have something of value to be considered educational. Stupid shit is not.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Just thought I woulod remind bigrednc of the OP and the topic. The fact that a US Circuit Court ruled on DOMA is what started this. The next step is SCOTUS.

And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws.
I will add that any state that recognized gay married the doma should not restrict that state . But any state that does not recognize same sex marriages they should not be force to do that.

The first step is to get gay marriages recognized by the federal gov't.

Then we work on the individual states that do not allow it. Equality is coming.

I have no problem watching a burning house.

 

[Katzndogz]

It's depravity that's coming. There never was such a thing as equality.

 

[Seawytch]

DOMA has been found unconstitutional by at least three federal courts now. This latest ruling was made by Republican justices so the "9th circuit court" card can't be played. A federal bankruptcy court found DOMA unconstitutional as well.

Looking at precedent, the SCOTUS has no other option than to rule in favor of gay marriage equality.

 

[bodecea]

And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws.
I will add that any state that recognized gay married the doma should not restrict that state . But any state that does not recognize same sex marriages they should not be force to do that.

The first step is to get gay marriages recognized by the federal gov't.

Then we work on the individual states that do not allow it. Equality is coming.

I have no problem watching a burning house.

Oh.....I just bet you don't.

 

[bodecea]

It's depravity that's coming. There never was such a thing as equality.

You wish there were no such thing as equality, you mean. Too bad. Sounds like our way of government in this country is not your cup of tea.

 

[bodecea]

DOMA has been found unconstitutional by at least three federal courts now. This latest ruling was made by Republican justices so the "9th circuit court" card can't be played. A federal bankruptcy court found DOMA unconstitutional as well.

Looking at precedent, the SCOTUS has no other option than to rule in favor of gay marriage equality.

Clinton knew it was only temporary when he signed it. I bet he's snickering now.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

DOMA has been found unconstitutional by at least three federal courts now. This latest ruling was made by Republican justices so the "9th circuit court" card can't be played. A federal bankruptcy court found DOMA unconstitutional as well.

Looking at precedent, the SCOTUS has no other option than to rule in favor of gay marriage equality.

The 9th circuit court of appeals? Are you shiting me? Are you talking about the same court that has had the more over turned decision of any appellant of in America?

 

[MaxCha]

The 9th circuit court of appeals? Are you shiting me? Are you talking about the same court that has had the more over turned decision of any appellant of in America?

I still remember the thread you started attacking Obama based on you miscounting the number 4. You called me a fucking liar for saying 47 minus 43 is 4, and posted multiple times telling us morons the answer is 3.

Next comes learning your ABC'S, then maybe a stance in politics.

_____________________

Yeah, DOMA needs to be thrown out. I do think Clinton is two-faced for making efforts to appeal to pro-equality voters yet at the same time signing DOMA in silence.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 9th circuit court of appeals? Are you shiting me? Are you talking about the same court that has had the more over turned decision of any appellant of in America?

I still remember the thread you started attacking Obama based on you miscounting the number 4. You called me a fucking liar for saying 47 minus 43 is 4, and posted multiple times telling us morons the answer is 3.

Next comes learning your ABC'S, then maybe a stance in politics.

_____________________

Yeah, DOMA needs to be thrown out. I do think Clinton is two-faced for making efforts to appeal to pro-equality voters yet at the same time signing DOMA in silence.

Here I hope you have learned something

U.S. Supreme Court again rejects most decisions by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: U.S. Supreme Court again rejects most 9th Circuit decisions - Los Angeles Times
All shit goes to Hawaii.