Tennessee Reminds SCOTUS: Separation of Powers: Passes Resolution Calling Out Gay Marriage Decision

[PaintMyHouse]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

 

[Silhouette]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. Why can't you accept that people have a difference of outlook on Obergefell?

Admit it. You knew if you pushed too hard this was going to happen. Well, the Justices fucked up and gave you what you demanded without really looking deeper than the surface. And now what's deeper is bubbling up. It was inevitable..

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Alabama Supreme Court refuses challenge to gay marriage

"BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — The Alabama Supreme Court refused Friday to defy the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that effectively legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, cutting off a conservative bid to prevent gay weddings in the state.

The court issued a one-sentence order dismissing a challenge by a probate judge and a conservative policy group that wanted the state to bar gay marriage despite the landmark federal decision.

In one of several written opinions accompanying the order, Justice Greg Shaw called the decision a “clear refusal” to ignore the Supreme Court ruling last June.

Several other state justices railed against the high court’s ruling while noting they can’t overturn it."
Alabama Supreme Court refuses challenge to gay marriage

 

[PaintMyHouse]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. Why can't you accept that people have a difference of outlook on Obergefell?

Admit it. You knew if you pushed too hard this was going to happen. Well, the Justices fucked up and gave you what you demanded without really looking deeper than the surface. And now what's deeper is bubbling up. It was inevitable..

Nothing illegal was done. See above.

"Eric Johnston, an attorney for the Alabama Policy Institute, which went to court seeking to prevent more gay marriages in Alabama, said the decision left opponents nowhere to turn in the court system.

“The order effectively ends the case,” he said in an email interview. “It appears to give us no option.”

Over, and done with. You lost. Your opinion, and that of those like you, matters not a damn...

 

[80zephyr]

And yet marriage equality will continue to be the reality in Tennessee as well as the other 49 states and there is nothing you bigots can do abouti it.

I think you're misusing the term "bigot".

No, a bigot is someone who harbors unwarranted animosity toward a class of persons and seeks to disadvantage them through force of law predicated solely on that unwarranted animosity.

Are you against pedophilia? If so, you are a bigot.

Mark

So you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults.

Why am I not surprised?

Lol. Who are you to say what the age of consent is? Your morality is showing, therefore, you are a bigot.

See how easy it is to call someone a bigot?

Mark

 

[pwjohn]

The Tennessee House of Representatives sent a message to the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday, passing a resolution expressing disagreement with the high court’s landmark decision legalizing same-sex marriage....With a 73-18 vote, the chamber passed the measure to not only disagree with the constitutional analysis used in Obergefell v. Hodges but to say the “judicial imposition of a natural marriage license law” is contrary to previous actions taken by the Tennessee legislature....On Wednesday, Rep. Susan Lynn, R-Old Hickory, the sponsor of the measure, told The Tennessean that her effort is focused on reminding the Supreme Court about the separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches of government. Tennessee House passes resolution criticizing same-sex marriage decision

More:

the resolution coincided with a lawsuit filed in Williamson County that seeks to halt the issuing of marriage licenses until a court settles the matter, Lynn told Stewart, "What we're doing here is very important."..

The lawsuits...

Second anti same-sex marriage lawsuit filed in Tennessee February 5, 2016 A second lawsuit has been filed in Tennessee challenging the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling overturning bans on same-sex marriage....The lawsuit was filed Thursday in Bradley County. It says the U.S. Supreme Court cannot overturn a law and then decide what the law should be. That should be up to the state legislatures, the lawsuit says.... a similar case in Williamson County on Jan. 21.“These lawsuits have had the additional positive effect of helping an increasing number of Tennesseans begin to appreciate the important constitutional boundaries that the United States...Supreme Court crossed in its Obergefell decision," Fowler said

Essentially, TN is forcing the US Supreme Court to cite in the US Constitution where it derived "gay marriage has to be legal" as a written law imposed upon the states. From what I can glean.. Loving v Virginia mentioned nothing about gay marriage...so case law doesn't exist. There is no mention I can tell in the Constitution where gay sex behaviors (just but not others) are specifically protected behaviors... So the SCOTUS is going to have its work cut out for it "explaining" the legal justification for Obergefell besides just their current mantra "gay marriage's time has come"...

That's silly. The church is not a legislative body in the state of Tennessee so they cannot impose church doctrine on the people by law.

 

[Syriusly]

And yet marriage equality will continue to be the reality in Tennessee as well as the other 49 states and there is nothing you bigots can do abouti it.

I think you're misusing the term "bigot".

No, a bigot is someone who harbors unwarranted animosity toward a class of persons and seeks to disadvantage them through force of law predicated solely on that unwarranted animosity.

Are you against pedophilia? If so, you are a bigot.

Mark

So you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults.

Why am I not surprised?

Lol. Who are you to say what the age of consent is? Your morality is showing, therefore, you are a bigot.

See how easy it is to call someone a bigot?

Mark

Sigh- and when did I say what the age of consent is? Is it is possible for you to post honestly?

Now- why do you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults?

 

[Syriusly]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

 

[80zephyr]

I think you're misusing the term "bigot".

No, a bigot is someone who harbors unwarranted animosity toward a class of persons and seeks to disadvantage them through force of law predicated solely on that unwarranted animosity.

Are you against pedophilia? If so, you are a bigot.

Mark

So you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults.

Why am I not surprised?

Lol. Who are you to say what the age of consent is? Your morality is showing, therefore, you are a bigot.

See how easy it is to call someone a bigot?

Mark

Sigh- and when did I say what the age of consent is? Is it is possible for you to post honestly?

Now- why do you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults?

"The rape of a child"....lol. Here you go again, using your own morality to make decisions for the rest of society.

Welcome bigot, its a big tent.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

Of course it can. They did in Dred Scott.

Mark

 

[Syriusly]

No, a bigot is someone who harbors unwarranted animosity toward a class of persons and seeks to disadvantage them through force of law predicated solely on that unwarranted animosity.

Are you against pedophilia? If so, you are a bigot.

Mark

So you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults.

Why am I not surprised?

Lol. Who are you to say what the age of consent is? Your morality is showing, therefore, you are a bigot.

See how easy it is to call someone a bigot?

Mark

Sigh- and when did I say what the age of consent is? Is it is possible for you to post honestly?

Now- why do you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults?

"The rape of a child"....lol. Here you go again, using your own morality to make decisions for the rest of society.

Welcome bigot, its a big tent.

Mark

Yeah- so not only do you equate child rape with consensual sex between adults- you find child rape something to laugh at.......wow....

 

[PaintMyHouse]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

Of course it can. They did in Dred Scott.

A bad decision, not an illegal decision, Marky...

 

[Syriusly]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

Of course it can. They did in Dred Scott.

Mark

And what was 'illegal' about Dred Scott?

 

[80zephyr]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

Of course it can. They did in Dred Scott.

A bad decision, not an illegal decision, Marky...

Nope, its illegal. Just nobody higher up to force them to comply with the law.

The founders understood that our nation could pass laws that were not constitutional, and that we would have to work against them.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

A judicial branch rewriting state laws is not a trivial matter. Four will vote to take it up.

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

Of course it can. They did in Dred Scott.

Mark

And what was 'illegal' about Dred Scott?

Lol. Sorta like asking what was illegal about the Holocaust. Nothing, I suppose, since the government made it legal.

Mark

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

Of course it can. They did in Dred Scott.

A bad decision, not an illegal decision, Marky...

Nope, its illegal. Just nobody higher up to force them to comply with the law.

The founders understood that our nation could pass laws that were not constitutional, and that we would have to work against them.

There was nothing illegal about Dred Scott, Marky. And the SC has the final say.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The decision has been made. Why can you not accept it is the question?

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

Of course it can. They did in Dred Scott.

Mark

And what was 'illegal' about Dred Scott?

Lol. Sorta like asking what was illegal about the Holocaust. Nothing, I suppose, since the government made it legal.

Mark

There is a big difference between immoral and illegal, they are not the same. Learn it, Marky...

 

[80zephyr]

Are you against pedophilia? If so, you are a bigot.

Mark

So you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults.

Why am I not surprised?

Lol. Who are you to say what the age of consent is? Your morality is showing, therefore, you are a bigot.

See how easy it is to call someone a bigot?

Mark

Sigh- and when did I say what the age of consent is? Is it is possible for you to post honestly?

Now- why do you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults?

"The rape of a child"....lol. Here you go again, using your own morality to make decisions for the rest of society.

Welcome bigot, its a big tent.

Mark

Yeah- so not only do you equate child rape with consensual sex between adults- you find child rape something to laugh at.......wow....

No, I'm laughing at you because you lack the intellectual depth to comprehend your bigotry.

Why is your morality not allowing consensual sex for children?

Thats bigotry

Mark




Mark

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults.

Why am I not surprised?

Lol. Who are you to say what the age of consent is? Your morality is showing, therefore, you are a bigot.

See how easy it is to call someone a bigot?

Mark

Sigh- and when did I say what the age of consent is? Is it is possible for you to post honestly?

Now- why do you equate pedophilia- the rape of a child- with consensual sex between two adults?

"The rape of a child"....lol. Here you go again, using your own morality to make decisions for the rest of society.

Welcome bigot, its a big tent.

Mark

Yeah- so not only do you equate child rape with consensual sex between adults- you find child rape something to laugh at.......wow....

No, I'm laughing at you because you lack the intellectual depth to comprehend your bigotry.

Why is your morality not allowing consensual sex for children?

Thats bigotry

Mark

It's legal for children to have consensual sex, Marky...

 

[80zephyr]

..lol... Because the decision was made illegally. It will be challenged. .

This is just one of the fundamental delusions you have.

The Supreme Court cannot make an illegal decision.

Of course it can. They did in Dred Scott.

A bad decision, not an illegal decision, Marky...

Nope, its illegal. Just nobody higher up to force them to comply with the law.

The founders understood that our nation could pass laws that were not constitutional, and that we would have to work against them.

There was nothing illegal about Dred Scott, Marky. And the SC has the final say.

The lack of mental acuity in this thread is...frightening.

Mark