Gay Marriages in States Forced by Circuit Courts to Allow Them Are Not Legal

[Syriusly]

Not all states have done this.

True. In fact, California, the poster-state for forced gay marriage against voters' Will, still bears Prop 8 in its constitution and that may not be changed unless by the voters themselves.

Strange how the LGBT lobby hasn't put it on the ballot yet... at ground-zero for "the majority of Americans now support gay marriage"....

Why would we put something on the ballot that is already legal?

Prop 8 was declared unconstitutional, and is invalid.

Same gender couples in love are getting married every day here.

Love is a wonderful thing.

What court struck down Prop 8? Supreme court or lower court?

The U.S. Federal Court, and that decision was confirmed by the Appellate Court, and left standing by the Supreme Court.

Ever since then, couples in love have been getting married.

 

[Syriusly]

Same with North Carolina we have a constitutional amendment for the same purpose.

Mixed race marriage ban was still on the books in North Carolina until 1971, 4 years after the Supreme Court ruled such bans were unconstitutional.

Irrelevant try again.

Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Same with North Carolina we have a constitutional amendment for the same purpose.

Mixed race marriage ban was still on the books in North Carolina until 1971, 4 years after the Supreme Court ruled such bans were unconstitutional.

Irrelevant try again.

Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

Your comment about Mixed race marriages is irrelevant

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Not all states have done this.

True. In fact, California, the poster-state for forced gay marriage against voters' Will, still bears Prop 8 in its constitution and that may not be changed unless by the voters themselves.

Strange how the LGBT lobby hasn't put it on the ballot yet... at ground-zero for "the majority of Americans now support gay marriage"....

Why would we put something on the ballot that is already legal?

Prop 8 was declared unconstitutional, and is invalid.

Same gender couples in love are getting married every day here.

Love is a wonderful thing.

What court struck down Prop 8? Supreme court or lower court?

The U.S. Federal Court, and that decision was confirmed by the Appellate Court, and left standing by the Supreme Court.

Ever since then, couples in love have been getting married.

So it wasn't the supreme court that struck it down?

 

[Syriusly]

Same with North Carolina we have a constitutional amendment for the same purpose.

Mixed race marriage ban was still on the books in North Carolina until 1971, 4 years after the Supreme Court ruled such bans were unconstitutional.

Irrelevant try again.

Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

Your comment about Mixed race marriages is irrelevant

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Same with North Carolina we have a constitutional amendment for the same purpose.

Mixed race marriage ban was still on the books in North Carolina until 1971, 4 years after the Supreme Court ruled such bans were unconstitutional.

Irrelevant try again.

Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

Your comment about Mixed race marriages is irrelevant

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

No still irrelevant gay marriage is not mixed race marriage sorry

 

[Syriusly]

Not all states have done this.

True. In fact, California, the poster-state for forced gay marriage against voters' Will, still bears Prop 8 in its constitution and that may not be changed unless by the voters themselves.

Strange how the LGBT lobby hasn't put it on the ballot yet... at ground-zero for "the majority of Americans now support gay marriage"....

Why would we put something on the ballot that is already legal?

Prop 8 was declared unconstitutional, and is invalid.

Same gender couples in love are getting married every day here.

Love is a wonderful thing.

What court struck down Prop 8? Supreme court or lower court?

The U.S. Federal Court, and that decision was confirmed by the Appellate Court, and left standing by the Supreme Court.

Ever since then, couples in love have been getting married.

So it wasn't the supreme court that struck it down?

What part of my explanation was unclear to you?

Prop 8 has been ruled unconstitutional and couples in love are getting married- and the children of same gender couples now have married parents.

Love is grand.

 

[Syriusly]

Mixed race marriage ban was still on the books in North Carolina until 1971, 4 years after the Supreme Court ruled such bans were unconstitutional.

Irrelevant try again.

Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

Your comment about Mixed race marriages is irrelevant

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

No still irrelevant gay marriage is not mixed race marriage sorry

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage that get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

 

[bigrebnc1775]

True. In fact, California, the poster-state for forced gay marriage against voters' Will, still bears Prop 8 in its constitution and that may not be changed unless by the voters themselves.

Strange how the LGBT lobby hasn't put it on the ballot yet... at ground-zero for "the majority of Americans now support gay marriage"....

Why would we put something on the ballot that is already legal?

Prop 8 was declared unconstitutional, and is invalid.

Same gender couples in love are getting married every day here.

Love is a wonderful thing.

What court struck down Prop 8? Supreme court or lower court?

The U.S. Federal Court, and that decision was confirmed by the Appellate Court, and left standing by the Supreme Court.

Ever since then, couples in love have been getting married.

So it wasn't the supreme court that struck it down?

What part of my explanation was unclear to you?

Prop 8 has been ruled unconstitutional and couples in love are getting married- and the children of same gender couples now have married parents.

Love is grand.

You said prop 8 was struck down but not by the supreme court we have another court that says all those court ruling aren't worth the paper they are wrote on.So PROP 8 the people choice should remain as is until the supreme court rules on it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Irrelevant try again.

Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

Your comment about Mixed race marriages is irrelevant

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

No still irrelevant gay marriage is not mixed race marriage sorry

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage that get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

Irrelevant still is and forever will be.

 

[Syriusly]

Why would we put something on the ballot that is already legal?

Prop 8 was declared unconstitutional, and is invalid.

Same gender couples in love are getting married every day here.

Love is a wonderful thing.

What court struck down Prop 8? Supreme court or lower court?

The U.S. Federal Court, and that decision was confirmed by the Appellate Court, and left standing by the Supreme Court.

Ever since then, couples in love have been getting married.

So it wasn't the supreme court that struck it down?

What part of my explanation was unclear to you?

Prop 8 has been ruled unconstitutional and couples in love are getting married- and the children of same gender couples now have married parents.

Love is grand.

You said prop 8 was struck down but not by the supreme court we have another court that says all those court ruling aren't worth the paper they are wrote on.So PROP 8 the people choice should remain as is until the supreme court rules on it.

You don't seem to quite understand our legal process.

A federal court ruled Prop 8 to be unconstitutional. That was appealed per the law to the Appellate Court, which upheld the decision. And that was decision was appealed to the Supreme Court- which heard the arguments and then let the ruling stand based upon standing.

That was the final appeal of Prop 8- it went through the entire appeal process and was found unconstitutional.

It doesn't matter what other courts say about other cases when it comes to Prop 8- it is dead.

 

[Syriusly]

Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

Your comment about Mixed race marriages is irrelevant

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

No still irrelevant gay marriage is not mixed race marriage sorry

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage that get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

Irrelevant still is and forever will be.

Oh I think it is very relevant.

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage that get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

Another interesting side note- the majority of Americans were against mixed race marriage until the mid 80's or 90's, even though such bans were found unconstitutional in 1967.

The majority of Americans already support same gender marriage.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Your comment about Mixed race marriages is irrelevant

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

No still irrelevant gay marriage is not mixed race marriage sorry

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage that get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law

Irrelevant still is and forever will be.

Oh I think it is very relevant.

Like I said
Just an interesting example of unconstitutional bans on marriage that get overturned by the courts before the voters get around to changing the law.

Another interesting side note- the majority of Americans were against mixed race marriage until the mid 80's or 90's, even though such bans were found unconstitutional in 1967.

The majority of Americans already support same gender marriage.

Nope no relevance between abnormal people wanting to marry and mixed race wanting to marry.

 

[Inevitable]

Yeah it's called being a hypocrite. No wonder the courts have already ruled on this and it's a dead issue that Sil just can't let go of.

Are you talking about the 6th circuit that didn't overstep it's authority and defaulted to Baker and Windsor until SCOTUS says otherwise? Or are you talking about the other rogue circuit courts who come January may see a few impeachments for what can only be called sedition for discarding procedural rules as they sought to overrule SCOTUS from underneath?...

...and in the 9th circuit's case, walking both sides of that line when it favors the LGBT cult they are beholden to (They're situated in San Francisco, CA). Remember how the federal courts said that for procedural reasons that Prop 8 defenders (registered voters from California who wanted their vote to count essentially) "didn't have standing"?

They used procedure to favor a gay outcome and then circumvented procedure to favor a gay outcome.

Pretty neat trick eh? And fodder for impeachment proceedings.... If I was a judge on the 9th circuit especially, I would be very nervous as January approaches. Maybe start filling out a resume and a "thank you card" for Mark Leno. That's the guy who is the main engine in that machine that's tearing through the country.

Really, it's called the states already removed their bans on same sex marriage and thus the court ruling isn't really relevant.

Not all states have done this.

Most have, and then they are going to move to the states that haven't. They will sue the federal government and likely win when the state discriminates.

The war isn't over but we have passed the turning point.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What court struck down Prop 8? Supreme court or lower court?

The U.S. Federal Court, and that decision was confirmed by the Appellate Court, and left standing by the Supreme Court.

Ever since then, couples in love have been getting married.

So it wasn't the supreme court that struck it down?

What part of my explanation was unclear to you?

Prop 8 has been ruled unconstitutional and couples in love are getting married- and the children of same gender couples now have married parents.

Love is grand.

You said prop 8 was struck down but not by the supreme court we have another court that says all those court ruling aren't worth the paper they are wrote on.So PROP 8 the people choice should remain as is until the supreme court rules on it.

You don't seem to quite understand our legal process.

A federal court ruled Prop 8 to be unconstitutional. That was appealed per the law to the Appellate Court, which upheld the decision. And that was decision was appealed to the Supreme Court- which heard the arguments and then let the ruling stand based upon standing.

That was the final appeal of Prop 8- it went through the entire appeal process and was found unconstitutional.

It doesn't matter what other courts say about other cases when it comes to Prop 8- it is dead.

How is PROP 8 dead? Did the supreme court rule on it?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yeah it's called being a hypocrite. No wonder the courts have already ruled on this and it's a dead issue that Sil just can't let go of.

Are you talking about the 6th circuit that didn't overstep it's authority and defaulted to Baker and Windsor until SCOTUS says otherwise? Or are you talking about the other rogue circuit courts who come January may see a few impeachments for what can only be called sedition for discarding procedural rules as they sought to overrule SCOTUS from underneath?...

...and in the 9th circuit's case, walking both sides of that line when it favors the LGBT cult they are beholden to (They're situated in San Francisco, CA). Remember how the federal courts said that for procedural reasons that Prop 8 defenders (registered voters from California who wanted their vote to count essentially) "didn't have standing"?

They used procedure to favor a gay outcome and then circumvented procedure to favor a gay outcome.

Pretty neat trick eh? And fodder for impeachment proceedings.... If I was a judge on the 9th circuit especially, I would be very nervous as January approaches. Maybe start filling out a resume and a "thank you card" for Mark Leno. That's the guy who is the main engine in that machine that's tearing through the country.

Really, it's called the states already removed their bans on same sex marriage and thus the court ruling isn't really relevant.

Not all states have done this.

Most have, and then they are going to move to the states that haven't. They will sue the federal government and likely win when the state discriminates.

The war isn't over but we have passed the turning point.

The supreme court none ruling was to put the issue back in the hands of the states.

 

[Syriusly]

The U.S. Federal Court, and that decision was confirmed by the Appellate Court, and left standing by the Supreme Court.

Ever since then, couples in love have been getting married.

So it wasn't the supreme court that struck it down?

What part of my explanation was unclear to you?

Prop 8 has been ruled unconstitutional and couples in love are getting married- and the children of same gender couples now have married parents.

Love is grand.

You said prop 8 was struck down but not by the supreme court we have another court that says all those court ruling aren't worth the paper they are wrote on.So PROP 8 the people choice should remain as is until the supreme court rules on it.

You don't seem to quite understand our legal process.

A federal court ruled Prop 8 to be unconstitutional. That was appealed per the law to the Appellate Court, which upheld the decision. And that was decision was appealed to the Supreme Court- which heard the arguments and then let the ruling stand based upon standing.

That was the final appeal of Prop 8- it went through the entire appeal process and was found unconstitutional.

It doesn't matter what other courts say about other cases when it comes to Prop 8- it is dead.

How is PROP 8 dead? Did the supreme court rule on it?

Sigh
Supreme Court Rules On Prop 8, Lets Gay Marriage Resume In California

Supreme Court Rules On Prop 8 Lets Gay Marriage Resume In California

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...eme-court-decision-on-proposition-8.html?_r=0


By refusing to decide Hollingsworth v. Perry directly, the justices have paved the way for a return of same-sex marriage for California couples. The decision, written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and Elena Kagan, declared that the supporters of Proposition 8 who argued in favor of the California ban on same-sex marriage had no legal standing, and negated the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy filed a dissenting opinion that was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Sonia Sotomayor.

 

[Inevitable]

Yeah it's called being a hypocrite. No wonder the courts have already ruled on this and it's a dead issue that Sil just can't let go of.

Are you talking about the 6th circuit that didn't overstep it's authority and defaulted to Baker and Windsor until SCOTUS says otherwise? Or are you talking about the other rogue circuit courts who come January may see a few impeachments for what can only be called sedition for discarding procedural rules as they sought to overrule SCOTUS from underneath?...

...and in the 9th circuit's case, walking both sides of that line when it favors the LGBT cult they are beholden to (They're situated in San Francisco, CA). Remember how the federal courts said that for procedural reasons that Prop 8 defenders (registered voters from California who wanted their vote to count essentially) "didn't have standing"?

They used procedure to favor a gay outcome and then circumvented procedure to favor a gay outcome.

Pretty neat trick eh? And fodder for impeachment proceedings.... If I was a judge on the 9th circuit especially, I would be very nervous as January approaches. Maybe start filling out a resume and a "thank you card" for Mark Leno. That's the guy who is the main engine in that machine that's tearing through the country.

Really, it's called the states already removed their bans on same sex marriage and thus the court ruling isn't really relevant.

Not all states have done this.

Most have, and then they are going to move to the states that haven't. They will sue the federal government and likely win when the state discriminates.

The war isn't over but we have passed the turning point.

The supreme court none ruling was to put the issue back in the hands of the states.

The court will likely place control in the hands of the states even after all of the states go ahead and last down arms. Two or three won't. But then people will start suing the state until the court rules doma section three unconstitutional. Then fair faith and credit will take over.

See a special rule was made to subvert the constitution for gay people. They don't have to interfere with states at all. Just reverse a law that they have already deemed half of it unconditional.

 

[Silhouette]

The court will likely place control in the hands of the states even after all of the states go ahead and last down arms. Two or three won't. But then people will start suing the state until the court rules doma section three unconstitutional. Then fair faith and credit will take over.

See a special rule was made to subvert the constitution for gay people. They don't have to interfere with states at all. Just reverse a law that they have already deemed half of it unconditional.

So why haven't the LGBT faithful put the initiative on the CA ballot to revoke Prop 8 from the constitution? Why was gay marraige put up for a vote in Ohio to formalize it and then suddenly ripped from the ballot? Pretty odd behavior for a sect that feels they have overwhelming support.

 

[Inevitable]

The court will likely place control in the hands of the states even after all of the states go ahead and last down arms. Two or three won't. But then people will start suing the state until the court rules doma section three unconstitutional. Then fair faith and credit will take over.

See a special rule was made to subvert the constitution for gay people. They don't have to interfere with states at all. Just reverse a law that they have already deemed half of it unconditional.

So why haven't the LGBT faithful put the initiative on the CA ballot to revoke Prop 8 from the constitution? Why was gay marraige put up for a vote in Ohio to formalize it and then suddenly ripped from the ballot? Pretty odd behavior for a sect that feels they have overwhelming support.

Why did you post this in response to my post?

I didn't mention a vote once. I frankly didn't mention any support or anything that you addressed.

I said that the majority of states have allowed same sex marriage and this will lead to people suing the government until they basically repeal doma section three.

I never mentioned anything about support. You must not read when you post a response.