Let the States Decide- ALA Supreme Court Justice urges Defiance- Gay Marraige

No, it's when they don't follow the law but make law

Well there's nothing to bitch about in this thread since judges haven't been making law when it come to gays and lesbians being able to civilly marry each other.
Of course they have. Dont be silly.

Please give us the name of one of those laws.

Ignoring legislatures and enacting government gay marriage
Those legislatures or the People, simply don't retain the Power to deny and disparage those privileges and immunities to the citizens in the several States, without changing our Constitution, to allow it.
blahblahblah
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
Strawman argument/
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
You as an adult it doesn't bother..

...untold numbers of children into the untold future who would be stripped of their right and privelege to have a mother and father incentivized to be in their lives as parents...that is who gay marriage will hurt..
 
And who will protect the orphaned heterosexual children from being adopted into homosexual lifestyles?

How exactly do you propose checking to see which 'orphans' are heterosexuals?
Why do you propose teaching children homosexuality before they reach puberty is the issue, not some false premise of your illogical defense of your actions which harms children.
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
Yes, Grown adults should stay out of others bedrooms. But that is not the case when you have two homosexual men or women who adopt orphaned children and teach them homosexuality.

Homosexuals are demanding government intervention, it is that simple.
 
What on earth would I be "butt hurt" about?


As a lesbian, the only reason I can think of is that you and your wife are doing it wrong.

That or you recently took up cycling and are in the process of breaking the gluteus maximus.


;)

>>>>

Well...not necessarily. I've known a lady or two that liked that sort of thing. Never been my cup if tea, but I've indulged a partner when requested.

Horseback riding I suppose would have the same "butt hurt" effect as the bicycle, especially if it's been a while. :D
 
And who will protect the orphaned heterosexual children from being adopted into homosexual lifestyles?

How exactly do you propose checking to see which 'orphans' are heterosexuals?
Why do you propose teaching children homosexuality before they reach puberty is the issue, not some false premise of your illogical defense of your actions which harms children.

You expressed your alarm that heterosexual children were going to be adopted by homosexuals- I want to know how you plan on figuring out which children are heterosexuals, so you can 'protect them'
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
Yes, Grown adults should stay out of others bedrooms. But that is not the case when you have two homosexual men or women who adopt orphaned children and teach them homosexuality.

Homosexuals are demanding government intervention, it is that simple.

No- its just that your viewpoint is simple and wrong.

Two homosexual men or two homosexual women who step up and adopt children abandoned by the children's natural parents are teaching them how to be good people- not how to be homosexuals.

You apparently would prefer that those children not be adopted, but remain abandoned and without families, to ultimately be abandoned by the system as the age out of the system.
.
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
You as an adult it doesn't bother..

...untold numbers of children into the untold future who would be stripped of their right and privelege to have a mother and father incentivized to be in their lives as parents...that is who gay marriage will hurt..

Gay marriage doesn't affect any children except the children of gay couples.

If their parents are allowed to marry- then they have married parents.
If their parents are not allowed to marry- then you just have denied those children married parents.
 
And who will protect the orphaned heterosexual children from being adopted into homosexual lifestyles?

How exactly do you propose checking to see which 'orphans' are heterosexuals?
Why do you propose teaching children homosexuality before they reach puberty is the issue, not some false premise of your illogical defense of your actions which harms children.

You expressed your alarm that heterosexual children were going to be adopted by homosexuals- I want to know how you plan on figuring out which children are heterosexuals, so you can 'protect them'
There
The premise of your question is false. Do you always argue a false premise.
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
Strawman argument/

In other words, Rabbi can't explain how two gay people getting married threatens anyone.
 
And who will protect the orphaned heterosexual children from being adopted into homosexual lifestyles?

How exactly do you propose checking to see which 'orphans' are heterosexuals?
Why do you propose teaching children homosexuality before they reach puberty is the issue, not some false premise of your illogical defense of your actions which harms children.

You expressed your alarm that heterosexual children were going to be adopted by homosexuals- I want to know how you plan on figuring out which children are heterosexuals, so you can 'protect them'
There
The premise of your question is false. Do you always argue a false premise.

Nope- not a false premise- here once again was your faux question:

And who will protect the orphaned heterosexual children from being adopted into homosexual lifestyles?

How are you going to determine which children are heterosexual so you can protect them?
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
Yes, Grown adults should stay out of others bedrooms. But that is not the case when you have two homosexual men or women who adopt orphaned children and teach them homosexuality.

Homosexuals are demanding government intervention, it is that simple.

No- its just that your viewpoint is simple and wrong.

Two homosexual men or two homosexual women who step up and adopt children abandoned by the children's natural parents are teaching them how to be good people- not how to be homosexuals.

You apparently would prefer that those children not be adopted, but remain abandoned and without families, to ultimately be abandoned by the system as the age out of the system.
.
You lost your argument, you just made it personal and about your beliefs.

You are describing the children as abandoned, why would you bring your personal feelings into this discussion while attempting to portray all orphaned children as abandoned. The simple answer is that facts do not support your feelings on this topic.

Yes, when you describe children in Orphanages as abandoned, and reiterate that theme throughout your post, it simply shows you have zero understanding of what happens in people's lives.

You should excuse your assumptions and emotions from this discussion, it does not help your argument at all.
 
And who will protect the orphaned heterosexual children from being adopted into homosexual lifestyles?

How exactly do you propose checking to see which 'orphans' are heterosexuals?
Why do you propose teaching children homosexuality before they reach puberty is the issue, not some false premise of your illogical defense of your actions which harms children.

You expressed your alarm that heterosexual children were going to be adopted by homosexuals- I want to know how you plan on figuring out which children are heterosexuals, so you can 'protect them'
There
The premise of your question is false. Do you always argue a false premise.

Nope- not a false premise- here once again was your faux question:

And who will protect the orphaned heterosexual children from being adopted into homosexual lifestyles?

How are you going to determine which children are heterosexual so you can protect them?
No, its a false premise, period. You are making another assumption.

Why would you propose forcing any child into a homosexual lifestyle?

Tough question for you, huh, you have chased my post for months, and you still just can not answer why you think its okay to force children into a your ideal homosexual lifestyle.

Why is it so important to you that children be forced to live with homosexuals.

Demented and broken you are, to abuse the innocent with your idea of how they should live.
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
Strawman argument/

In other words, Rabbi can't explain how two gay people getting married threatens anyone.
That's true. I cannot explain how it causes hunger in Africa. Or how it causes global warming either. That doesnt mean those things have ever been arguments against "gay marriage." I can tell you that defining marriage is a state power which is being undermined by an activist judiciary. I can tell you that gay marriage is poor public policy because it undermines the purpose of state sponsored marriage to begin with.
The only arguments against those two are Arguments 1 and 2.
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
Strawman argument/

In other words, Rabbi can't explain how two gay people getting married threatens anyone.
That's true. I cannot explain how it causes hunger in Africa. Or how it causes global warming either. That doesnt mean those things have ever been arguments against "gay marriage." I can tell you that defining marriage is a state power which is being undermined by an activist judiciary. I can tell you that gay marriage is poor public policy because it undermines the purpose of state sponsored marriage to begin with.
The only arguments against those two are Arguments 1 and 2.
You may tell anyone anything you like, but it remains subjective opinion and factually wrong.

The issue has nothing to do with 'defining' marriage; indeed, all parties involved agree as to the definition of marriage and in no way seek to 'redefine' it.

The issue concerns the fact that same-sex couples are eligible to enter into marriage contracts in all 50 states, where some states seek to deny gay Americans access to marriage law in violation of the 14th Amendment.

Americans are citizens of the United States first and foremost, residents of the states subordinate to that, including gay Americans. Citizens' civil rights as guaranteed and protected by the Federal Constitution are consequently immune from attack by the states. As a fact of settled, accepted, and fundamental Constitutional jurisprudence the states have no 'authority' whatsoever to 'decide' who will or will not have his civil rights.
 
As a married heterosexual man, how does two gay people getting married a threat to me or my country? For those that want less gov't intervention, they should stay out of grown adults bedrooms...hyprocrites and weak minded dupes.
Strawman argument/

In other words, Rabbi can't explain how two gay people getting married threatens anyone.
That's true. I cannot explain how it causes hunger in Africa. Or how it causes global warming either. That doesnt mean those things have ever been arguments against "gay marriage." I can tell you that defining marriage is a state power which is being undermined by an activist judiciary. I can tell you that gay marriage is poor public policy because it undermines the purpose of state sponsored marriage to begin with.
The only arguments against those two are Arguments 1 and 2.
You may tell anyone anything you like, but it remains subjective opinion and factually wrong.

The issue has nothing to do with 'defining' marriage; indeed, all parties involved agree as to the definition of marriage and in no way seek to 'redefine' it.

The issue concerns the fact that same-sex couples are eligible to enter into marriage contracts in all 50 states, where some states seek to deny gay Americans access to marriage law in violation of the 14th Amendment.

Americans are citizens of the United States first and foremost, residents of the states subordinate to that, including gay Americans. Citizens' civil rights as guaranteed and protected by the Federal Constitution are consequently immune from attack by the states. As a fact of settled, accepted, and fundamental Constitutional jurisprudence the states have no 'authority' whatsoever to 'decide' who will or will not have his civil rights.

We can if we decide to carry out what our founding fathers would expect us to do. That is overthrow a lawless Un-Constitutional government. The jury is no longer out on that conclusion

-Geaux
 

Forum List

Back
Top