SCOTUS divided over SSM

[rightwinger]

Homophobes are gonna be homophobes. (People in this thread)

the thread is about the division in the SC. I don't really think that anyone posting in this thread is afraid of gays.

but what is quite clear is that you fear open equal debate. Because when its open and equal you always lose, your left wing bullshit always loses, your marxist collectivist bullshit always loses. In short, you are a loser.

Really? Their is literally no logical reason to oppose homosexuals getting married other then religious bullshit, or homophobia (Afraid of gays, thinking gays will destroy marriage..)

There's also no logical reason to not allow states to decide that from themselves so that marriage truly reflects the value of the people, not activist judges.

Civil rights are not up for a vote, and never should have been. You might as well allow them to define a state religion, and we don't. It's also not up for a vote.

Lifestyle choice is not a civil right.

Is your chosen religion a lifestyle choice?

 

[Katzndogz]

Once polygamous marriage is legalized a father marrying his son to avoid inheritance tax won't matter since the son will also be able to marry and have a family of his own.

It's the rise of a new clan system.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

It will go 6-3 in favor

maybe, then you and your brother jake snarkey can get married

but seriously RW, if you get the ruling you want, what exactly would prevent brothers from marrying? what exactly would prevent fathers and sons from marrying to avoid inheritence taxes?

the slippery slope is real, whether you realize it or not.

The only thing real is the right wing hysteria about every change in society dating back to the women getting the right to vote, integrating the military, etc...

You've been on the wrong side of the argument 100% of the time.

Lifestyle choice and women's suffrage are two different things, skid mark.

But amazingly, you're wrong about both.

How does it feel to have your grip on society loosening with each passing day? It must really suck to see life passing you by....

I would feel sorry for you but it's rather fun watching it play out.

Actually I think that you faghadists will shriek in demonic rage when the Supreme Court goes against you. Never mind that they'll never end gay marriage, just return the issue back to the states, you demand complete domination and will have a spectacular temper tantrum when it doesn't happen.

 

[Redfish]

the thread is about the division in the SC. I don't really think that anyone posting in this thread is afraid of gays.

but what is quite clear is that you fear open equal debate. Because when its open and equal you always lose, your left wing bullshit always loses, your marxist collectivist bullshit always loses. In short, you are a loser.

Really? Their is literally no logical reason to oppose homosexuals getting married other then religious bullshit, or homophobia (Afraid of gays, thinking gays will destroy marriage..)

There's also no logical reason to not allow states to decide that from themselves so that marriage truly reflects the value of the people, not activist judges.

Civil rights are not up for a vote, and never should have been. You might as well allow them to define a state religion, and we don't. It's also not up for a vote.

Lifestyle choice is not a civil right.

Is your chosen religion a lifestyle choice?

this is not about religion, its about biology and anatomy.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

the thread is about the division in the SC. I don't really think that anyone posting in this thread is afraid of gays.

but what is quite clear is that you fear open equal debate. Because when its open and equal you always lose, your left wing bullshit always loses, your marxist collectivist bullshit always loses. In short, you are a loser.

Really? Their is literally no logical reason to oppose homosexuals getting married other then religious bullshit, or homophobia (Afraid of gays, thinking gays will destroy marriage..)

There's also no logical reason to not allow states to decide that from themselves so that marriage truly reflects the value of the people, not activist judges.

Civil rights are not up for a vote, and never should have been. You might as well allow them to define a state religion, and we don't. It's also not up for a vote.

Lifestyle choice is not a civil right.

Is your chosen religion a lifestyle choice?

Religion is protected. Gay butt sex isn't. You should read the Constitution sometime.

 

[Anathema]

I think that states should be deprived of any power to withhold recognition of any marriage, just like it is with drivers licenses. That's a fair compromise. But you faghadists don't want compromise, you want to have your way and fuck anyone who disagrees with you.

Then you would agree, under that philosophy, that my CCW permit should be good in all 50 states, all US Territories, and the District of Columbia, RIGHT?

 

[Stephanie]

Are you people on the left EVER HONEST and have any damn HONOR you have to make up lies against others in this country?

as if it's only the RIGHT who objects to everything you all demand (like homosexual marriage) be passed on people

California was far from THE RIGHT when they voted down (gay marriage) but you want to brush all that aside and just blame THE RIGHT

You people are shameful in the hate and division YOU INTENTIONALLY SPREAD

 

[Katzndogz]

That's YOUR opinion and is meaningless. And again, its ignorant, impotent, anti-Americans like you that make our constitution necessary. Deal with it.

No. That's THOUSANDS of years of history and tradition talking. Isn't it amazing that the moment we start chancing those traditional/historic philosophies on things, this country heads down the toilet drain of history at a rapid pace?

That's the way it has always happened.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I think that states should be deprived of any power to withhold recognition of any marriage, just like it is with drivers licenses. That's a fair compromise. But you faghadists don't want compromise, you want to have your way and fuck anyone who disagrees with you.

Then you would agree, under that philosophy, that my CCW permit should be good in all 50 states, all US Territories, and the District of Columbia, RIGHT?

Yes. It should.

 

[candycorn]

Homophobes are gonna be homophobes. (People in this thread)

the thread is about the division in the SC. I don't really think that anyone posting in this thread is afraid of gays.

but what is quite clear is that you fear open equal debate. Because when its open and equal you always lose, your left wing bullshit always loses, your marxist collectivist bullshit always loses. In short, you are a loser.

Really? Their is literally no logical reason to oppose homosexuals getting married other then religious bullshit, or homophobia (Afraid of gays, thinking gays will destroy marriage..)

There's also no logical reason to not allow states to decide that from themselves so that marriage truly reflects the value of the people, not activist judges.

Sure there is.

If you're an employee who is managing a branch of a bank and you're up for a promotion that involves moving to a state where you and your partner will be breaking the law and/or whose marriage won't be recognized, you're being deprived of the 3L's by the government.

Amazing how you right wing shitballs love talking about how evil the government it right up until you want to use it to bless marriage.

I think that states should be deprived of any power to withhold recognition of any marriage, just like it is with drivers licenses. That's a fair compromise. But you faghadists don't want compromise, you want to have your way and fuck anyone who disagrees with you.

I've said the same thing you've said--2 years before you even showed up:;

I think it was Liability that had the best idea of all on this:

The State should get out of the marriage business. Make all "marriages" that are now on the books--hetero/homo--a civil union. If you want to get married, you get a certificate from your house of worship or your lodge or your local tavern or where ever. But in the eyes of the State; you form a civil union thus legally availing you and your spouse of the responsibilities and the benefits.

the State should be out of the marriage business. But while it is, you should be allowed to marry who you want since the union does not damage anyone outside of the union.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Really? Their is literally no logical reason to oppose homosexuals getting married other then religious bullshit, or homophobia (Afraid of gays, thinking gays will destroy marriage..)

There's also no logical reason to not allow states to decide that from themselves so that marriage truly reflects the value of the people, not activist judges.

Civil rights are not up for a vote, and never should have been. You might as well allow them to define a state religion, and we don't. It's also not up for a vote.

Lifestyle choice is not a civil right.

Is your chosen religion a lifestyle choice?

Religion is protected. Gay butt sex isn't. You should read the Constitution sometime.

It has nothing at all with what they do in bed. It has only to do with what happens at the country clerk's office.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

That's YOUR opinion and is meaningless. And again, its ignorant, impotent, anti-Americans like you that make our constitution necessary. Deal with it.

No. That's THOUSANDS of years of history and tradition talking. Isn't it amazing that the moment we start chancing those traditional/historic philosophies on things, this country heads down the toilet drain of history at a rapid pace?

Nope. Its not "THOUSANDS of years of history and tradition". Not even close. Its not even hundreds of years. Not even ONE hundred years.

Nor have the many changes to "marriage" caused any country or culture down a toilet drain. To say that is just silly.

 

[Marxist]

Really? Their is literally no logical reason to oppose homosexuals getting married other then religious bullshit, or homophobia (Afraid of gays, thinking gays will destroy marriage..)

There's no logical reason to have same sex marriage. Genders matter. So homophobia is now defined as fear of marriage destruction? You have a unique dictionary.

Yes there is, two loving members of the same sex want to get married, yes, genders do matter, when it comes to fucking, what does it matter there? Marriage destruction? LOL. Do you think two gay men getting married destroys marriage? You must have a shitty marriage then.

I have no issues with your homosexual pleasure seeking, rich lifestyle. I do not have issues for homosexuals getting into legally binding contracts but do not called it marriage. That's where the issues come when you try to destroy families to fade the lines between normal people and pleasure seeking homosexuals.

Destroy families? Yeah, clearly not a homophobe. Thanks for saying what your side actually thinks though.

 

[candycorn]

Really? Their is literally no logical reason to oppose homosexuals getting married other then religious bullshit, or homophobia (Afraid of gays, thinking gays will destroy marriage..)

There's also no logical reason to not allow states to decide that from themselves so that marriage truly reflects the value of the people, not activist judges.

Civil rights are not up for a vote, and never should have been. You might as well allow them to define a state religion, and we don't. It's also not up for a vote.

Lifestyle choice is not a civil right.

Is your chosen religion a lifestyle choice?

this is not about religion, its about biology and anatomy.

No.

It's about insurance benefits, survivor benefits, the right to visit your loved one in the freaking hospital....

It's amazing how you guys want the government so small it fits right in the bedroom.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

There's also no logical reason to not allow states to decide that from themselves so that marriage truly reflects the value of the people, not activist judges.

Civil rights are not up for a vote, and never should have been. You might as well allow them to define a state religion, and we don't. It's also not up for a vote.

Lifestyle choice is not a civil right.

Is your chosen religion a lifestyle choice?

Religion is protected. Gay butt sex isn't. You should read the Constitution sometime.

It has nothing at all with what they do in bed. It has only to do with what happens at the country clerk's office.

And according to the 10th Amendment, that is categorically a state issue. Being queer isn't a civil right.

 

[candycorn]

Are you people on the left EVER HONEST and have any damn HONOR you have to make up lies against others in this country?

as if it's only the RIGHT who objects to everything you all demand (like homosexual marriage) be passed on people

California was far from THE RIGHT when they voted down (gay marriage) but you want to brush all that aside and just blame THE RIGHT

You people are shameful in the hate and division YOU INTENTIONALLY SPREAD

We blame the ignorant. You=ignorant. So we blame you.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Civil rights are not up for a vote, and never should have been. You might as well allow them to define a state religion, and we don't. It's also not up for a vote.

Lifestyle choice is not a civil right.

Is your chosen religion a lifestyle choice?

Religion is protected. Gay butt sex isn't. You should read the Constitution sometime.

It has nothing at all with what they do in bed. It has only to do with what happens at the country clerk's office.

And according to the 10th Amendment, that is categorically a state issue. Being queer isn't a civil right.

Welcome to the Right to Privacy, and Equal Protection, which means you're fucked.

Why don't you just start dealing with the fact that you've lost, and move on?

 

[candycorn]

Civil rights are not up for a vote, and never should have been. You might as well allow them to define a state religion, and we don't. It's also not up for a vote.

Lifestyle choice is not a civil right.

Is your chosen religion a lifestyle choice?

Religion is protected. Gay butt sex isn't. You should read the Constitution sometime.

It has nothing at all with what they do in bed. It has only to do with what happens at the country clerk's office.

And according to the 10th Amendment, that is categorically a state issue. Being queer isn't a civil right.

Being "straight" is a civil right?

 

[Uncensored2008]

It will go 6-3 in favor

Wait a minute. Wasn't Kagan recused from this argument, or did she not recuse herself?

Perhaps I read something erroneously in the last days.

I was busy writing a small book somewhere else.

Kagan lacks the integrity to recuse herself.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

the thread is about the division in the SC. I don't really think that anyone posting in this thread is afraid of gays.

but what is quite clear is that you fear open equal debate. Because when its open and equal you always lose, your left wing bullshit always loses, your marxist collectivist bullshit always loses. In short, you are a loser.

Really? Their is literally no logical reason to oppose homosexuals getting married other then religious bullshit, or homophobia (Afraid of gays, thinking gays will destroy marriage..)

There's also no logical reason to not allow states to decide that from themselves so that marriage truly reflects the value of the people, not activist judges.

Sure there is.

If you're an employee who is managing a branch of a bank and you're up for a promotion that involves moving to a state where you and your partner will be breaking the law and/or whose marriage won't be recognized, you're being deprived of the 3L's by the government.

Amazing how you right wing shitballs love talking about how evil the government it right up until you want to use it to bless marriage.

I think that states should be deprived of any power to withhold recognition of any marriage, just like it is with drivers licenses. That's a fair compromise. But you faghadists don't want compromise, you want to have your way and fuck anyone who disagrees with you.

I've said the same thing you've said--2 years before you even showed up:;

I think it was Liability that had the best idea of all on this:

The State should get out of the marriage business. Make all "marriages" that are now on the books--hetero/homo--a civil union. If you want to get married, you get a certificate from your house of worship or your lodge or your local tavern or where ever. But in the eyes of the State; you form a civil union thus legally availing you and your spouse of the responsibilities and the benefits.

the State should be out of the marriage business. But while it is, you should be allowed to marry who you want since the union does not damage anyone outside of the union.

The state will never be out of the marriage business. That's nothing more than libertarian drivel. Marriage is a legal and financial institution as well as a social one and people themselves will never allow it to be otherwise. It's been that way throughout human history and the delusions of the libertarian Left cannot change it. So how about we stop proposing things that aren't even remotely possible?