Is another Civil War brewing?

[Skylar]

Obergefell will not be overturned by any peacefull challenge. Same sex marriage will be the law of the land until the system is changed.

I'd like to see Russia change it.

Of course you would. As I said, there's no creature on god's green earth that hates the United States more or more longs for her downfall.....than a fringe right conservative.

This country has changed so much that it no longer deserves to survive. Just the fact that we have such a thing as same sex marriage is proof of that.

No nation has survived the normalization of homosexuality. We won't either and it can't happen soon enough.

What about those nations that didn't normalize homosexuality? How many of them didn't survive?

If you're attributing causation, then surely they're all still around. Right?

 

[mdk]

Obergefell will not be overturned by any peacefull challenge. Same sex marriage will be the law of the land until the system is changed.

I'd like to see Russia change it.

You are free to go and join them to bring about this change. Make sure your Hoveround is fully charged, we wouldn't the battery dying on the battlefield.

 

[Katzndogz]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

 

[Skylar]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

Describe this 'stronger power with a large network of collaboration'. Because it sounds depressingly like a network of secret police.

 

[Katzndogz]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

Describe this 'stronger power with a large network of collaboration'. Because it sounds depressingly like a network of secret police.

I would hope that Russia steps up to the plate and ends the American experiment with liberalism, perversion and corruption. I would be honored to be an informant.

 

[Dot Com]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

IOW's do what my siggie pic says Tipsycatlover . I thought you claimed that you were educated?

 

[Skylar]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

Describe this 'stronger power with a large network of collaboration'. Because it sounds depressingly like a network of secret police.

I would hope that Russia steps up to the plate and ends the American experiment with liberalism, perversion and corruption. I would be honored to be an informant.

What activities would you 'inform' on? And who would you inform to?

 

[Katzndogz]

IOW's vote for

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

IOW's do what my siggie pic says Tipsycatlover . I thought you claimed that you were educated?

Even the very well educated. Particularly the very well educated recognizes that the country is too divided to survive intact. Without a stronger force imposing a cohesive system it will just continue to slowly dissolve.

 

[Skylar]

IOW's vote for

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

IOW's do what my siggie pic says Tipsycatlover . I thought you claimed that you were educated?

Even the very well educated. Particularly the very well educated recognizes that the country is too divided to survive intact. Without a stronger force imposing a cohesive system it will just continue to slowly dissolve.

And the strong force you're proposing...is the Russian government which would take over the US and set up a system of informants?

Okay. What would they be 'informing' on?

 

[Katzndogz]

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

Describe this 'stronger power with a large network of collaboration'. Because it sounds depressingly like a network of secret police.

I would hope that Russia steps up to the plate and ends the American experiment with liberalism, perversion and corruption. I would be honored to be an informant.

What activities would you 'inform' on? And who would you inform to?

In a better world, I would be informing on people like yourself and do it to a Russian neighborhood commander.

 

[Skylar]

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

Describe this 'stronger power with a large network of collaboration'. Because it sounds depressingly like a network of secret police.

I would hope that Russia steps up to the plate and ends the American experiment with liberalism, perversion and corruption. I would be honored to be an informant.

What activities would you 'inform' on? And who would you inform to?

In a better world, I would be informing on people like yourself and do it to a Russian neighborhood commander.

And what would you be informing a Russian neighborhood commander about me, specifically?

 

[Silhouette]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

Could be, but I'd give it less than a 20% chance of really happening.

Agreed. There will be no "civil war" because New York vs Ferber upon peaceful civil challenge will overturn Obergefell and the question of states defining marriage will be affirmed in favor of the states. There never was a provision in the Constitution for either 1. Just some deviant repugnant sex behaviors but not others (polygamy, for instance which the 14th says should also right now be legal) or 2. A definition or promise of a "right" for everyone to marry anyone they like.

Loving v Virgina was about race, not behavior. And it didn't eradicate a mother and father for children. Gay marriage does, and that's a problem. And, harmful ultimately to children. New York vs Ferber (1982) was a USSC Finding that says that even if an adult enjoys a constitutionally-protect right, even as rock-solid as the 1st Amendment which the Court slavishly finds in favor of, that right cannot hurt a child or children physically or psychologically.

Ferber was a depraved man who was trying to peddle child pornography featuring two young boys masturbating. He claimed when New York shut him down, that doing so was his constitutional right. He won initially in the lower courts but when SCOTUS reviewed his "right" they recoiled and determined that no, there was a clear line in the sand when children are involved in any adult "right" if that right harms them. Then, it isn't constitutionally-protected. An interesting case for those thinking about challenging Obergefell 2015...

Ferber never so much as mentions marriage. Let alone finds that same sex marriage 'hurts children'. Ferber is merely your case of the month. You'll forget about in a few weeks and come up with a brand new irrelevant case you insist will overturn Obergefell. And then forget about that one too.

Back in reality, Obergefell is fine. And your pseudo-legal babble is still irrelevant.

As you know, when people use previous Court Findings to support their argument, they don't narrow down to specifics, but instead argue the GENERALIZED finding of a case. In Ferber, the generalized finding was that even when a person enjoys a civil right...even one as rock-solid and supported by previous case law as the 1st Amendment, that right is suspended if that "enjoyment" involves hurting children physically or psychologically.

Using your logic, Loving v Virginia never mentioned gay marriage...so....it can't be used to argue that "gay marriage should be legal across 50 states"..

 

[mdk]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

Could be, but I'd give it less than a 20% chance of really happening.

Agreed. There will be no "civil war" because New York vs Ferber upon peaceful civil challenge will overturn Obergefell and the question of states defining marriage will be affirmed in favor of the states. There never was a provision in the Constitution for either 1. Just some deviant repugnant sex behaviors but not others (polygamy, for instance which the 14th says should also right now be legal) or 2. A definition or promise of a "right" for everyone to marry anyone they like.

Loving v Virgina was about race, not behavior. And it didn't eradicate a mother and father for children. Gay marriage does, and that's a problem. And, harmful ultimately to children. New York vs Ferber (1982) was a USSC Finding that says that even if an adult enjoys a constitutionally-protect right, even as rock-solid as the 1st Amendment which the Court slavishly finds in favor of, that right cannot hurt a child or children physically or psychologically.

Ferber was a depraved man who was trying to peddle child pornography featuring two young boys masturbating. He claimed when New York shut him down, that doing so was his constitutional right. He won initially in the lower courts but when SCOTUS reviewed his "right" they recoiled and determined that no, there was a clear line in the sand when children are involved in any adult "right" if that right harms them. Then, it isn't constitutionally-protected. An interesting case for those thinking about challenging Obergefell 2015...

Ferber never so much as mentions marriage. Let alone finds that same sex marriage 'hurts children'. Ferber is merely your case of the month. You'll forget about in a few weeks and come up with a brand new irrelevant case you insist will overturn Obergefell. And then forget about that one too.

Back in reality, Obergefell is fine. And your pseudo-legal babble is still irrelevant.

As you know, when people use previous Court Findings to support their argument, they don't narrow down to specifics, but instead argue the GENERALIZED finding of a case. In Ferber, the generalized finding was that even when a person enjoys a civil right...even one as rock-solid and supported by previous case law as the 1st Amendment, that right is suspended if that "enjoyment" involves hurting children physically or psychologically.

Using your logic, Loving v Virginia never mentioned gay marriage...so....it can't be used to argue that "gay marriage should be legal across 50 states"..

You do realize spamming the same exact dumn shit doesn't make it any more true, right?

 

[Skylar]

Ferber never so much as mentions marriage. Let alone finds that same sex marriage 'hurts children'. Ferber is merely your case of the month. You'll forget about in a few weeks and come up with a brand new irrelevant case you insist will overturn Obergefell. And then forget about that one too.

Back in reality, Obergefell is fine. And your pseudo-legal babble is still irrelevant.

As you know, when people use previous Court Findings to support their argument, they don't narrow down to specifics, but instead argue the GENERALIZED finding of a case.

Alas, the supreme court has already found specifically....that denying same sex marriage hurts kids.

"And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.....

.....DOMA also brings financial harm to children of samesex couples. It raises the cost of health care for families by taxing health benefits provided by employers to their workers’ same-sex spouses. And it denies or reduces benefits allowed to families upon the loss of a spouse and parent, benefits that are an integral part of family security."

And again in Obergefell:

A third basis for protecting the right to marry is that it safeguards children and families and thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing, procreation, and education. Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser. They also suffer the significant material costs of being raised by unmarried parents, relegated to a more difficult and uncertain family life. The marriage laws at issue thus harm and humiliate the children of same-sex couples.
And that recognizing same sex marriage helps children:

And finally, the Supreme Court found that same sex marriage benefits children:

By giving recognition and legal structure to their parents’ relationship, marriage allows children “to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.” Marriage also affords the permanency and stability important to children’s best interests.

And affirm again that same sex marriage benefits children, recognizing gays and lesbians as creating loving, supportive families:

As all parties agree, many same-sex couples provide loving and nurturing homes to their children, whether biological or adopted. And hundreds of thousands of children are presently being raised by such couples. Most States have allowed gays and lesbians to adopt, either as individuals or as couples, and many adopted and foster children have same-sex parents. This provides powerful confirmation from the law itself that gays and lesbians can create loving, supportive families.

So what court would ignore the specific findings of the Supreme Court as it relates to children and same sex marriage.......for your imagination about 'general findings' in a case that never so much as mentions marriage nor says anything about children and same sex marriage?

 

[Dot Com]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

You're right. It is alarmist.

And I believe, in the land of Johnny Mercer and Tennessee Williams and William Faulkner there are LGBT people living, working, paying taxes, active in their community and church and thankful that they have equal access to the protections of a marriage license.

The Conservatives who, as usual, are acting out in a fit of pique would find it difficult to rally armed support for the cause of repressing American citizens.

Don't forget Truman Capote

There is no division like North v South. The corruption is too pervasive. The division is more house by house, block by block. The ordinary mechanism of revolution won't work. It needs a stronger power with a large network of collaboration to end what we have made.

IOW's do what my siggie pic says Tipsycatlover . I thought you claimed that you were educated?

Even the very well educated. Particularly the very well educated recognizes that the country is too divided to survive intact. Without a stronger force imposing a cohesive system it will just continue to slowly dissolve.

So EXTRA Constitutional means? You didn't see my siggie pic did you?

Why is it rw'ers, YOU in this instance, resort to violence? More likely because you can't field any electable candidates is more like it.

And you talking about crime in the streets

 

[Skylar]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

Could be, but I'd give it less than a 20% chance of really happening.

Agreed. There will be no "civil war" because New York vs Ferber upon peaceful civil challenge will overturn Obergefell and the question of states defining marriage will be affirmed in favor of the states. There never was a provision in the Constitution for either 1. Just some deviant repugnant sex behaviors but not others (polygamy, for instance which the 14th says should also right now be legal) or 2. A definition or promise of a "right" for everyone to marry anyone they like.

Loving v Virgina was about race, not behavior. And it didn't eradicate a mother and father for children. Gay marriage does, and that's a problem. And, harmful ultimately to children. New York vs Ferber (1982) was a USSC Finding that says that even if an adult enjoys a constitutionally-protect right, even as rock-solid as the 1st Amendment which the Court slavishly finds in favor of, that right cannot hurt a child or children physically or psychologically.

Ferber was a depraved man who was trying to peddle child pornography featuring two young boys masturbating. He claimed when New York shut him down, that doing so was his constitutional right. He won initially in the lower courts but when SCOTUS reviewed his "right" they recoiled and determined that no, there was a clear line in the sand when children are involved in any adult "right" if that right harms them. Then, it isn't constitutionally-protected. An interesting case for those thinking about challenging Obergefell 2015...

Ferber never so much as mentions marriage. Let alone finds that same sex marriage 'hurts children'. Ferber is merely your case of the month. You'll forget about in a few weeks and come up with a brand new irrelevant case you insist will overturn Obergefell. And then forget about that one too.

Back in reality, Obergefell is fine. And your pseudo-legal babble is still irrelevant.

As you know, when people use previous Court Findings to support their argument, they don't narrow down to specifics, but instead argue the GENERALIZED finding of a case. In Ferber, the generalized finding was that even when a person enjoys a civil right...even one as rock-solid and supported by previous case law as the 1st Amendment, that right is suspended if that "enjoyment" involves hurting children physically or psychologically.

Using your logic, Loving v Virginia never mentioned gay marriage...so....it can't be used to argue that "gay marriage should be legal across 50 states"..

You do realize spamming the same exact dumn shit doesn't make it any more true, right?

It not for us. Its for her. She finds the rhetorical thumb sucking soothing.

Its a balm of the cognitive dissonance that arises when the world doesn't match her pseudo-legal predictions of it.

 

[mdk]

It not for us. Its for her. She finds the rhetorical thumb sucking soothing.

Its a balm of the cognitive dissonance that arises when the world doesn't match her pseudo-legal predictions of i

Obviously. It's why Sil is quoting a post from June to whine about queers again. In other words, the sun still rises. lol

 

[Katzndogz]

That the Supreme Court found that same sex marriage benefits children is as meaningless as the Dred Scott ruling.

Of course same sex marriage doesn't benefit children. The substantial benefit of a family relationship can't be changed by a court ruling.

 

[Skylar]

That the Supreme Court found that same sex marriage benefits children is as meaningless as the Dred Scott ruling.

Of course same sex marriage doesn't benefit children. The substantial benefit of a family relationship can't be changed by a court ruling.

If you understood anything about the law, you'd realize that in court its not meaningless. Its called 'binding precedent'. Which begs the question about your claims, what's the use of legal argument that has no use in court?

And denying same sex marriage doesn't magically change same sex parents into opposite sex parents. I merely guarantees that these children never have married parents. Which hurts these children. And help none.

Though I am curious, do you think that the children or same sex couples be taken from them.

 

[Katzndogz]

... or is that alarmist?
Even the "gay marriage" is aligning South vs. North...or no?

Could be, but I'd give it less than a 20% chance of really happening.

Agreed. There will be no "civil war" because New York vs Ferber upon peaceful civil challenge will overturn Obergefell and the question of states defining marriage will be affirmed in favor of the states. There never was a provision in the Constitution for either 1. Just some deviant repugnant sex behaviors but not others (polygamy, for instance which the 14th says should also right now be legal) or 2. A definition or promise of a "right" for everyone to marry anyone they like.

Loving v Virgina was about race, not behavior. And it didn't eradicate a mother and father for children. Gay marriage does, and that's a problem. And, harmful ultimately to children. New York vs Ferber (1982) was a USSC Finding that says that even if an adult enjoys a constitutionally-protect right, even as rock-solid as the 1st Amendment which the Court slavishly finds in favor of, that right cannot hurt a child or children physically or psychologically.

Ferber was a depraved man who was trying to peddle child pornography featuring two young boys masturbating. He claimed when New York shut him down, that doing so was his constitutional right. He won initially in the lower courts but when SCOTUS reviewed his "right" they recoiled and determined that no, there was a clear line in the sand when children are involved in any adult "right" if that right harms them. Then, it isn't constitutionally-protected. An interesting case for those thinking about challenging Obergefell 2015...

Ferber never so much as mentions marriage. Let alone finds that same sex marriage 'hurts children'. Ferber is merely your case of the month. You'll forget about in a few weeks and come up with a brand new irrelevant case you insist will overturn Obergefell. And then forget about that one too.

Back in reality, Obergefell is fine. And your pseudo-legal babble is still irrelevant.

As you know, when people use previous Court Findings to support their argument, they don't narrow down to specifics, but instead argue the GENERALIZED finding of a case. In Ferber, the generalized finding was that even when a person enjoys a civil right...even one as rock-solid and supported by previous case law as the 1st Amendment, that right is suspended if that "enjoyment" involves hurting children physically or psychologically.

Using your logic, Loving v Virginia never mentioned gay marriage...so....it can't be used to argue that "gay marriage should be legal across 50 states"..

You cannot fly in the face of reality. Your opinion that the Loving case cannot be used to support same sex marriage denies the fact that it was, and favorably. The Supreme Court has ruled that the marriage of perverts is a benefit to children.

It doesn't mean that perv marriage really is a benefit to children, merely that the Supreme Court said it was. Since we are a nation of laws, (as filtered through social justice) it will remain this way until such time as social justice is replaced by real justice.