Happy Loving Day to all my American Friends

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2016
48,225
20,946
2,300
Y Cae Ras
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



1592032621596.png
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
Sorry, no.

It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
“States’ rights” would be the ‘justification’ used by those hostile to the Loving ruling.

The ‘tyrants in a black robes,’ ‘legislating from the bench,’ ‘in violation of the will of the people’ crowd.

The rights and protected liberties of American citizens residing in the states is not subject to ‘majority rule.’
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
Sorry, no.

It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.
Is this the same basis for same sex marriage?
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
Sorry, no.

It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.
Is this the same basis for same sex marriage?
Correct.

The states may not deny citizens access to marriage law because of race or sexual orientation.
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
Sorry, no.

It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.
Is this the same basis for same sex marriage?
Probably, even though it’s apples and oranges.
Lefties aren’t very bright.
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Thank you Tommy. I saw the movie which featured Timothy Hutton. I can't remember if they've made another one since.
I saw this one on netflix a little while back. Its worth a,look, especially if you like Ruth Negga.
 
That 'leftist' document has caused a lot of upset. What were those 'liberals' thinking about, writing that Constitution?
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
most liberals think it was a form of discrimination against black people

they see it as an extension of Jim Crow
 
It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.

Yep. Further milestones to come were Lawrence v. Texas (2003) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). It remains to be seen how much the current majority will succeed in setting back the nation after half a century of halting, excruciatingly slow progress since Loving.
 
I can’t believe the Virginia Supreme Court would allow it.

In 1965, Virginia trial court Judge Leon Bazile, who heard their original case, refused to reconsider his decision. Instead, he defended racial segregation, writing:

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay, and red, and placed them on separate continents, and but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend the races to mix.
 
Last edited:
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
Sorry, no.

It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.
Is this the same basis for same sex marriage?
Correct.

The states may not deny citizens access to marriage law because of race or sexual orientation.
There has never been a law that denies the right to marriage based on sexual orientation. Rock Hudson was gay and he got married.
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
Sorry, no.

It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.
Is this the same basis for same sex marriage?
Correct.

The states may not deny citizens access to marriage law because of race or sexual orientation.
There has never been a law that denies the right to marriage based on sexual orientation. Rock Hudson was gay and he got married.
No he didn’t.
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Thank you Tommy. I saw the movie which featured Timothy Hutton. I can't remember if they've made another one since.
I saw this one on netflix a little while back. Its worth a,look, especially if you like Ruth Negga.
Wow! Someone named Negga in a movie about race

Wow
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
Sorry, no.

It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.
Is this the same basis for same sex marriage?
Correct.

The states may not deny citizens access to marriage law because of race or sexual orientation.
There has never been a law that denies the right to marriage based on sexual orientation. Rock Hudson was gay and he got married.
No he didn’t.
He married Wally Cox
 
Brave Americans who fought for a fundamental freedom in " the land of the free".



View attachment 349650
Do you understand the meaning and significance of the ruling?

(Hint: it’s not about interracial marriage…)
State's rights?
Sorry, no.

It’s the further codification of the doctrine of inalienable rights as acknowledged by the 14th Amendment; that no manifestation of government – Federal, state, or local – has the authority to deny American citizens the right to due process of the law and equal protection of the law because of who they are, in the case of Loving, the right to access marriage law.
Is this the same basis for same sex marriage?
Correct.

The states may not deny citizens access to marriage law because of race or sexual orientation.
There has never been a law that denies the right to marriage based on sexual orientation. Rock Hudson was gay and he got married.
No he didn’t.
He married Wally Cox
Phyllis Gates.
 

Forum List

Back
Top