Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They did not "create a law". They struck from the law those provisions that limited marriage to one man and one women. Are you suggesting that no one that has gotten married in any of the states where Obergefell invalidated the gay marriage ban is actually married? Are you under the false impression that when the Supreme Court invalidates part of a law, the entire law ceases to exist? Just another thing you got wrong.So again...what law was created by the Supreme Court? Either give its statute # or its text.They are not limited to "interpreting"law. Once again, your abject ignorance of the constitution rears its ugly head. They are empowered to determine if any law passed violates a provision of the Constitution. If that laws does, the Supreme Court is obligated to strike it.The role and authority of the Supreme Court is enshrined in our Constitution. If the people of the U.S. believed that branch of government was acting in a manner not in accordance with the Constitution, the people could rectify that. We never have because most believe the Supreme Court functions within the guidelines of the Constitution. The Supreme Court acted within its jurisdiction on Obergefell.
The Court is making law, not interpreting it. The proper decision would have been to allow the states to issue marriage licenses as they see fit, but force states to recognize all licenses issued by other States.
All your side has is appeal to authority.
Yes, they are. Only the legislature can create law. Your side seems to think the other branches can do it if it fits your agenda.
Marriage was always seen as between a man and a woman, the laws were only changed when people tried to register other types, with no historical precedence.
They created law without name or text, and that's the point.
What keeps this going is your repeated posting of things that are not true. Your repeated posting of claims about the constitution and the law that are completely and utterly wrong. You are commenting on a topic that you have no understanding of.You know...you should really leave the personal insults to the other side. Just saying.You are a fucking idiot. The first amendment does not permit people to act contrary to the law on the basis of their religion. Only laws that specifically target religious expression are unconstitutional. How can one be so stupid as to not understand the difference between thought and action?They are not punishing thoughts. That is a lie you have repeated. They are punishing actions.You are using their actions as an end run to punish Thought Crime.
Again, nothing but an end run around the 1st amendment, and the fine is to stifle other's in their beliefs.
This is only the first shot your side is firing on making Thought Crime an actual crime.
After 190+ pages the name calling is the only thing keeping this going.
No new concept was created...a restriction was struck down.Marriage is now the law of the land and government is no longer allowed to restrict SSM. Getting rid of a restriction is NOT the same as creating new law. It's really basic stuff here.If the court had made law, you'd be able to give us either a statute # or at least the text of the new law. As of yet, you have not.So...you don't have it. Because this new law doesn't really exist.
The court is overstepping its bounds by making law, just as in Roe, your attempt at minutiae is just that, an attempt.
Again, then why is SSM now the "law of the land"?
Actually it is. when you create a concept that NEVER existed as a concept in a States law, you are creating it.
What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.I don't give a damn who you know. The truth is the left supports abortion and corruption, yet has no problem using government in a tyrannical manner on citizens who refuse to bow to your queer agenda.I am a Leftie and have never murdered a baby in my life. Nor do I know any Lefties that have done so. And I do not ignore the Constitution....in fact, I seem to know what's in it more than many RWrs here. And I have yet to even have the opportunity to vote for Hillary let alone choose to vote for her.Lefties murder babies, ignore the constitution, and vote for corrupt politicians like Hillary, but if you refuse to bake a wedding cake for queers then you're in big trouble.
And if you have a cake baking BUSINESS, best know the business laws in your state. It's prudent.
The definition of marriage was changed. That's not the job of the USSC, and I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that the constitution had nothing to do with the decision.No new concept was created...a restriction was struck down.Marriage is now the law of the land and government is no longer allowed to restrict SSM. Getting rid of a restriction is NOT the same as creating new law. It's really basic stuff here.If the court had made law, you'd be able to give us either a statute # or at least the text of the new law. As of yet, you have not.The court is overstepping its bounds by making law, just as in Roe, your attempt at minutiae is just that, an attempt.
Again, then why is SSM now the "law of the land"?
Actually it is. when you create a concept that NEVER existed as a concept in a States law, you are creating it.
The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.I don't give a damn who you know. The truth is the left supports abortion and corruption, yet has no problem using government in a tyrannical manner on citizens who refuse to bow to your queer agenda.I am a Leftie and have never murdered a baby in my life. Nor do I know any Lefties that have done so. And I do not ignore the Constitution....in fact, I seem to know what's in it more than many RWrs here. And I have yet to even have the opportunity to vote for Hillary let alone choose to vote for her.Lefties murder babies, ignore the constitution, and vote for corrupt politicians like Hillary, but if you refuse to bake a wedding cake for queers then you're in big trouble.
And if you have a cake baking BUSINESS, best know the business laws in your state. It's prudent.
Good for you. I, and most Americans, agree with the five justices in the majority and the couple of dozen other federal judges who have concluded that the right of gay Americans to equal protection of the law and to liberty is entitled to be protected.The definition of marriage was changed. That's not the job of the USSC, and I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that the constitution had nothing to do with the decision.No new concept was created...a restriction was struck down.Marriage is now the law of the land and government is no longer allowed to restrict SSM. Getting rid of a restriction is NOT the same as creating new law. It's really basic stuff here.If the court had made law, you'd be able to give us either a statute # or at least the text of the new law. As of yet, you have not.
Again, then why is SSM now the "law of the land"?
Actually it is. when you create a concept that NEVER existed as a concept in a States law, you are creating it.
So, you marriage has changed? How?The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.I don't give a damn who you know. The truth is the left supports abortion and corruption, yet has no problem using government in a tyrannical manner on citizens who refuse to bow to your queer agenda.I am a Leftie and have never murdered a baby in my life. Nor do I know any Lefties that have done so. And I do not ignore the Constitution....in fact, I seem to know what's in it more than many RWrs here. And I have yet to even have the opportunity to vote for Hillary let alone choose to vote for her.Lefties murder babies, ignore the constitution, and vote for corrupt politicians like Hillary, but if you refuse to bake a wedding cake for queers then you're in big trouble.
And if you have a cake baking BUSINESS, best know the business laws in your state. It's prudent.
You have only ONE more USSC judge than us. That can be remedied. The 14th amendment has been twisted and tortured to make the decision. We can fix this corruption with one appointment.Good for you. I, and most Americans, agree with the five justices in the majority and the couple of dozen other federal judges who have concluded that the right of gay Americans to equal protection of the law and to liberty is entitled to be protected.The definition of marriage was changed. That's not the job of the USSC, and I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that the constitution had nothing to do with the decision.No new concept was created...a restriction was struck down.Marriage is now the law of the land and government is no longer allowed to restrict SSM. Getting rid of a restriction is NOT the same as creating new law. It's really basic stuff here.Again, then why is SSM now the "law of the land"?
Actually it is. when you create a concept that NEVER existed as a concept in a States law, you are creating it.
What did I say?So, you marriage has changed? How?The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.I don't give a damn who you know. The truth is the left supports abortion and corruption, yet has no problem using government in a tyrannical manner on citizens who refuse to bow to your queer agenda.I am a Leftie and have never murdered a baby in my life. Nor do I know any Lefties that have done so. And I do not ignore the Constitution....in fact, I seem to know what's in it more than many RWrs here. And I have yet to even have the opportunity to vote for Hillary let alone choose to vote for her.Lefties murder babies, ignore the constitution, and vote for corrupt politicians like Hillary, but if you refuse to bake a wedding cake for queers then you're in big trouble.
And if you have a cake baking BUSINESS, best know the business laws in your state. It's prudent.
Do me a favor? Hold your breath until that happens.You have only ONE more USSC judge than us. That can be remedied. The 14th amendment has been twisted and tortured to make the decision. We can fix this corruption with one appointment.Good for you. I, and most Americans, agree with the five justices in the majority and the couple of dozen other federal judges who have concluded that the right of gay Americans to equal protection of the law and to liberty is entitled to be protected.The definition of marriage was changed. That's not the job of the USSC, and I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that the constitution had nothing to do with the decision.No new concept was created...a restriction was struck down.Marriage is now the law of the land and government is no longer allowed to restrict SSM. Getting rid of a restriction is NOT the same as creating new law. It's really basic stuff here.
Actually it is. when you create a concept that NEVER existed as a concept in a States law, you are creating it.
You, in a very eloquent explanation of the legal underpinnings of your disagreement with the rulings of a couple dozen federal judges, "Piss on your corrupt judges".What did I say?So, you marriage has changed? How?The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.I don't give a damn who you know. The truth is the left supports abortion and corruption, yet has no problem using government in a tyrannical manner on citizens who refuse to bow to your queer agenda.I am a Leftie and have never murdered a baby in my life. Nor do I know any Lefties that have done so. And I do not ignore the Constitution....in fact, I seem to know what's in it more than many RWrs here. And I have yet to even have the opportunity to vote for Hillary let alone choose to vote for her.
And if you have a cake baking BUSINESS, best know the business laws in your state. It's prudent.
Correct trash.Do me a favor? Hold your breath until that happens.You have only ONE more USSC judge than us. That can be remedied. The 14th amendment has been twisted and tortured to make the decision. We can fix this corruption with one appointment.Good for you. I, and most Americans, agree with the five justices in the majority and the couple of dozen other federal judges who have concluded that the right of gay Americans to equal protection of the law and to liberty is entitled to be protected.The definition of marriage was changed. That's not the job of the USSC, and I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that the constitution had nothing to do with the decision.No new concept was created...a restriction was struck down.Actually it is. when you create a concept that NEVER existed as a concept in a States law, you are creating it.
Correct? Meaning you will hold your breath? Great.Correct trash.Do me a favor? Hold your breath until that happens.You have only ONE more USSC judge than us. That can be remedied. The 14th amendment has been twisted and tortured to make the decision. We can fix this corruption with one appointment.Good for you. I, and most Americans, agree with the five justices in the majority and the couple of dozen other federal judges who have concluded that the right of gay Americans to equal protection of the law and to liberty is entitled to be protected.The definition of marriage was changed. That's not the job of the USSC, and I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that the constitution had nothing to do with the decision.No new concept was created...a restriction was struck down.
Yes. Piss on your queer agenda and your corrupt judges. Anything else?You, in a very eloquent explanation of the legal underpinnings of your disagreement with the rulings of a couple dozen federal judges, "Piss on your corrupt judges".What did I say?So, you marriage has changed? How?The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.I don't give a damn who you know. The truth is the left supports abortion and corruption, yet has no problem using government in a tyrannical manner on citizens who refuse to bow to your queer agenda.
All we need is ONE constitutionalist. Anything else?Correct? Meaning you will hold your breath? Great.Correct trash.Do me a favor? Hold your breath until that happens.You have only ONE more USSC judge than us. That can be remedied. The 14th amendment has been twisted and tortured to make the decision. We can fix this corruption with one appointment.Good for you. I, and most Americans, agree with the five justices in the majority and the couple of dozen other federal judges who have concluded that the right of gay Americans to equal protection of the law and to liberty is entitled to be protected.The definition of marriage was changed. That's not the job of the USSC, and I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that the constitution had nothing to do with the decision.
So, you are into golden showers? That is perverted.Yes. Piss on your queer agenda and your corrupt judges. Anything else?You, in a very eloquent explanation of the legal underpinnings of your disagreement with the rulings of a couple dozen federal judges, "Piss on your corrupt judges".What did I say?So, you marriage has changed? How?The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.
We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.All we need is ONE constitutionalist. Anything else?Correct? Meaning you will hold your breath? Great.Correct trash.Do me a favor? Hold your breath until that happens.You have only ONE more USSC judge than us. That can be remedied. The 14th amendment has been twisted and tortured to make the decision. We can fix this corruption with one appointment.Good for you. I, and most Americans, agree with the five justices in the majority and the couple of dozen other federal judges who have concluded that the right of gay Americans to equal protection of the law and to liberty is entitled to be protected.
The definition of marriage is not static. It never has been. To think so shows a woeful lack of historical knowledge.The definition of marriage was changed. That's not the job of the USSC, and I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that the constitution had nothing to do with the decision.No new concept was created...a restriction was struck down.Marriage is now the law of the land and government is no longer allowed to restrict SSM. Getting rid of a restriction is NOT the same as creating new law. It's really basic stuff here.If the court had made law, you'd be able to give us either a statute # or at least the text of the new law. As of yet, you have not.
Again, then why is SSM now the "law of the land"?
Actually it is. when you create a concept that NEVER existed as a concept in a States law, you are creating it.
Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.All we need is ONE constitutionalist. Anything else?Correct? Meaning you will hold your breath? Great.Correct trash.Do me a favor? Hold your breath until that happens.You have only ONE more USSC judge than us. That can be remedied. The 14th amendment has been twisted and tortured to make the decision. We can fix this corruption with one appointment.
