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.
Lost in 3 states only. The other 47 are a different story.Marriage Equality isn't a gay pride parade there Sil. It's people being equal before the law, which is why your side lost. No one can find any reason that a reasonable person, meaning not you, finds valid for that kind of discrimination. The State's best interest is to get people married, not deny them.
What you believe to be true, isn't. It's not up for a vote, never should have been.Lost in 3 states only. The other 47 are a different story.Marriage Equality isn't a gay pride parade there Sil. It's people being equal before the law, which is why your side lost. No one can find any reason that a reasonable person, meaning not you, finds valid for that kind of discrimination. The State's best interest is to get people married, not deny them.
Windsor 2013 is the SCOTUS' "States' Choice" constitutional Finding on gay marriage.
So unless they reverse it..your "great sweeping victory" is only legal in 3 states..."in the way the Framers of the Constitution intended" [direct quote from Windsor 2013 just after multiple assertions by the Court that states have the "unquestioned authority" on marriage defining.]
It is true & anyone can read it for themselves pages 14-24 of the 2013 Finding Opinion here: United States v. Windsor (DOMA)What you believe to be true, isn't. It's not up for a vote, never should have been.Lost in 3 states only. The other 47 are a different story.Marriage Equality isn't a gay pride parade there Sil. It's people being equal before the law, which is why your side lost. No one can find any reason that a reasonable person, meaning not you, finds valid for that kind of discrimination. The State's best interest is to get people married, not deny them.
Windsor 2013 is the SCOTUS' "States' Choice" constitutional Finding on gay marriage.
So unless they reverse it..your "great sweeping victory" is only legal in 3 states..."in the way the Framers of the Constitution intended" [direct quote from Windsor 2013 just after multiple assertions by the Court that states have the "unquestioned authority" on marriage defining.]
This dog not only hunted "Paint" but it bit the Gay Agenda right in the butt July 18, 2014. The fight isn't over. In fact for your side the pendulum swing-back has only just begun.
Brace yourself for a series of legal setbacks. If that's what you call restoring the control of human behaviors and who may marry back to state level "a defeat". I consider it a victory for democracy.
A limited grouping of deviant sex behaviors-as-cult using the 14th Amendment to dictate to an unwilling majority is the dog that ain't gonna hunt friend...
This dog not only hunted "Paint" but it bit the Gay Agenda right in the butt July 18, 2014. The fight isn't over. In fact for your side the pendulum swing-back has only just begun.
Brace yourself for a series of legal setbacks. If that's what you call restoring the control of human behaviors and who may marry back to state level "a defeat". I consider it a victory for democracy.
A limited grouping of deviant sex behaviors-as-cult using the 14th Amendment to dictate to an unwilling majority is the dog that ain't gonna hunt friend...
The People's decision on matters taken to the vote should be paramount. Winner takes all, no judge should override a legal vote.
This dog not only hunted "Paint" but it bit the Gay Agenda right in the butt July 18, 2014. The fight isn't over. In fact for your side the pendulum swing-back has only just begun.
Brace yourself for a series of legal setbacks. If that's what you call restoring the control of human behaviors and who may marry back to state level "a defeat". I consider it a victory for democracy.
A limited grouping of deviant sex behaviors-as-cult using the 14th Amendment to dictate to an unwilling majority is the dog that ain't gonna hunt friend...
The People's decision on matters taken to the vote should be paramount. Winner takes all, no judge should override a legal vote.
Important and potentially foreshadowing Decision with huge implications gets no press at all: (had to find this on a tiny local outlet). And it may mean that Prop 8 in California will be ruled on constitutionally finally as valid. See discussion below as to why that is important today.
U.S. Supreme Court grants Utah's appeal to stay gay marriage court order
Friday, July 18, 2014 4:22 p.m. CDT
(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to a request from Utah for an emergency stay of an appeals court order that told the state to recognize hundreds of same-sex marriages performed there pending an appeal.
The appeal for a stay by Utah's attorney general had been widely expected since the 10th Circuit appeals court left intact an existing temporary stay in order to give the state time to seek a lengthier injunction from a higher court.
(Reporting by Daniel Wallis in Denver; Editing by Eric Beech) U.S. Supreme Court grants Utah's appeal to stay gay marriage court order - News - KFGO The Mighty 790AM - Fargo Moorhead, ND
Not heard a PEEP about this in the MSM.
The AG of Utah cited [and apparently swayed with the argument that] Utah's voters' rights were in danger of being suppressed.
And that's why you're not hearing this story on MSNBC for sure. Not sure why it's being hidden on Fox but I have several theories.
This is big news. This is HUGE news. This is the US Supreme Court saying "we are letting the public know that we at least are considering the heavy weight of voters' rights to define marriage for themselves in each state".
I'm pretty sure justice Sotomayor was overseeing this appeal. Might have been the whole panel, I'm not sure. But that would include Kennedy. Apparently the SCOTUS has read its own opinion on Windsor 2013... Others might want to read it too in order to cipher what's is potentially coming: restoration of Prop 8 [which was never ruled on constitutionally and is still law in CA].
And I point that out because now as we speak, CA rogue officials are currently gutting subservient laws [Family Code ruled by Prop 8's definition] in violation of 7 million voters' state and federal constitutional rights to have the weight of their vote counted in democracy. That state has a constitutional statute that says no initiative law may be erased or altered in any way [including potency to rule lower code laws it defines] without another referendum from the voters. This is de facto sedition with no mitigating sugar coat.
For more on the legal discussion visit this thread: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ady-progression-of-sedition-and-contempt.html
Also: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html
And: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...future-attempt-another-coup-on-democracy.html
The Story You're Not Hearing in the MSM: July 2014 SCOTUS Upholds Ban on Gay Marriage
What it says is that The Court feels Utah's argument has merit. That's newsworthy.This Order stays the effect of their ruling, pending appeal, nothing more. It does not change the original ruling.
State judge strikes down Florida's gay marriage ban, stays ruling | Reuters
^ Hey Sillhy no one's reporting on this, from yesterday, either. Know why? It's not news anymore bud. You're not allowed to discriminate against people. It doesn't matter how badly you want to.
...Since the Supreme Court ordered the federal government last year to extend benefits to legally married gay couples, every federal and state court that has taken up the issue of same-sex marriage – about 20 courts - has ruled against state bans.
Most of these rulings are on hold.
Don Price Johnston, a 44-year-old plaintiff in the Miami lawsuit, said he was thrilled with the ruling and that he did not mind that it had been stayed for now.
"It's not like we're going to lose. We just have to wait," he said. "I have been waiting for more than 25 years for this right. A few more months won't kill me."..
The People's decision on matters taken to the vote should be paramount. Winner takes all, no judge should override a legal vote.
How'd that Hobby Lobby decision go for you? The People support Hobby Lobby.This dog not only hunted "Paint" but it bit the Gay Agenda right in the butt July 18, 2014. The fight isn't over. In fact for your side the pendulum swing-back has only just begun.
Brace yourself for a series of legal setbacks. If that's what you call restoring the control of human behaviors and who may marry back to state level "a defeat". I consider it a victory for democracy.
A limited grouping of deviant sex behaviors-as-cult using the 14th Amendment to dictate to an unwilling majority is the dog that ain't gonna hunt friend...
The People's decision on matters taken to the vote should be paramount. Winner takes all, no judge should override a legal vote.
Your position is both childish and wrong. It's not how it's done here.
What it says is that The Court feels Utah's argument has merit. That's newsworthy.This Order stays the effect of their ruling, pending appeal, nothing more. It does not change the original ruling.
State judge strikes down Florida's gay marriage ban, stays ruling | Reuters
^ Hey Sillhy no one's reporting on this, from yesterday, either. Know why? It's not news anymore bud. You're not allowed to discriminate against people. It doesn't matter how badly you want to.
From your link:
...Since the Supreme Court ordered the federal government last year to extend benefits to legally married gay couples, every federal and state court that has taken up the issue of same-sex marriage about 20 courts - has ruled against state bans.
Most of these rulings are on hold.
Don Price Johnston, a 44-year-old plaintiff in the Miami lawsuit, said he was thrilled with the ruling and that he did not mind that it had been stayed for now.
"It's not like we're going to lose. We just have to wait," he said. "I have been waiting for more than 25 years for this right. A few more months won't kill me."..
Yes & while he is sitting in the waiting room he should read "Windsor 2013 Quarterly".
The People's decision on matters taken to the vote should be paramount. Winner takes all, no judge should override a legal vote.
Your house will be one of the first they'll visit when The New Order takes over...
Until then we can rely on what our ears & eyes are telling us:
Again, should Utah allow this?:
This dog not only hunted "Paint" but it bit the Gay Agenda right in the butt July 18, 2014. The fight isn't over. In fact for your side the pendulum swing-back has only just begun.
Brace yourself for a series of legal setbacks. If that's what you call restoring the control of human behaviors and who may marry back to state level "a defeat". I consider it a victory for democracy.
A limited grouping of deviant sex behaviors-as-cult using the 14th Amendment to dictate to an unwilling majority is the dog that ain't gonna hunt friend...
The People's decision on matters taken to the vote should be paramount. Winner takes all, no judge should override a legal vote.
This dog not only hunted "Paint" but it bit the Gay Agenda right in the butt July 18, 2014. The fight isn't over. In fact for your side the pendulum swing-back has only just begun.
Brace yourself for a series of legal setbacks. If that's what you call restoring the control of human behaviors and who may marry back to state level "a defeat". I consider it a victory for democracy.
A limited grouping of deviant sex behaviors-as-cult using the 14th Amendment to dictate to an unwilling majority is the dog that ain't gonna hunt friend...
The People's decision on matters taken to the vote should be paramount. Winner takes all, no judge should override a legal vote.
The Constitution guarantees that the tyranny of the majority cannot deprive anyone of their individual rights.
You live in a fantasyland, which should come crashing down soon enough considering that half the nation of gays can already get married and it's no big deal to normal people. Carry on...This dog not only hunted "Paint" but it bit the Gay Agenda right in the butt July 18, 2014. The fight isn't over. In fact for your side the pendulum swing-back has only just begun.
Brace yourself for a series of legal setbacks. If that's what you call restoring the control of human behaviors and who may marry back to state level "a defeat". I consider it a victory for democracy.
A limited grouping of deviant sex behaviors-as-cult using the 14th Amendment to dictate to an unwilling majority is the dog that ain't gonna hunt friend...
You live in a fantasyland, which should come crashing down soon enough considering that half the nation of gays can already get married and it's no big deal to normal people. Carry on...This dog not only hunted "Paint" but it bit the Gay Agenda right in the butt July 18, 2014. The fight isn't over. In fact for your side the pendulum swing-back has only just begun.
Brace yourself for a series of legal setbacks. If that's what you call restoring the control of human behaviors and who may marry back to state level "a defeat". I consider it a victory for democracy.
A limited grouping of deviant sex behaviors-as-cult using the 14th Amendment to dictate to an unwilling majority is the dog that ain't gonna hunt friend...
You got it right for a change PMH, normal people are those who choose not to be sexually perverse.
The fact that those same 'normal people' as you call them, are the ones who voted for marriage to equate to one man and one woman, seem to indicate that they think it is a 'big deal.'
It is un-American to attempt to deny your fellow citizens equal rights under the law. Normal people don't vote to take away the rights of their fellow citizens whether those rights are about voting, marriage, privacy or bearing arms.
So no, those who voted for Prop 8 and DOMA do not fit the definition of "normal" since they were behaving irrationally based upon their personal religious beliefs.
It is un-American to attempt to deny your fellow citizens equal rights under the law. Normal people don't vote to take away the rights of their fellow citizens whether those rights are about voting, marriage, privacy or bearing arms.
So no, those who voted for Prop 8 and DOMA do not fit the definition of "normal" since they were behaving irrationally based upon their personal religious beliefs.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...wins-gay-legal-challenges-simple-as-that.html
Behaviors don't have "rights" of a minority to dictate to a majority. We have local penal and civil codes to handle behaviors in discreet communities. You'll have to plead state by state.
That's what Windsor 2013 says.
You live in a fantasyland, which should come crashing down soon enough considering that half the nation of gays can already get married and it's no big deal to normal people. Carry on...
You got it right for a change PMH, normal people are those who choose not to be sexually perverse.
The fact that those same 'normal people' as you call them, are the ones who voted for marriage to equate to one man and one woman, seem to indicate that they think it is a 'big deal.'
It is un-American to attempt to deny your fellow citizens equal rights under the law. Normal people don't vote to take away the rights of their fellow citizens whether those rights are about voting, marriage, privacy or bearing arms.
So no, those who voted for Prop 8 and DOMA do not fit the definition of "normal" since they were behaving irrationally based upon their personal religious beliefs.
You got it right for a change PMH, normal people are those who choose not to be sexually perverse.
The fact that those same 'normal people' as you call them, are the ones who voted for marriage to equate to one man and one woman, seem to indicate that they think it is a 'big deal.'
It is un-American to attempt to deny your fellow citizens equal rights under the law. Normal people don't vote to take away the rights of their fellow citizens whether those rights are about voting, marriage, privacy or bearing arms.
So no, those who voted for Prop 8 and DOMA do not fit the definition of "normal" since they were behaving irrationally based upon their personal religious beliefs.
Religious beliefs have nothing to do with the argument. It's morals that are up for grabs.
As I have continually said, homosexuality is a choice, people are not born that way, like a child is born with downs syndrome. They choose to act in a way that is perverse and immoral.
If a person wants to be immoral in the privacy of their own bedroom, who is anyone to tell them not to? Problem is, homosexuals want to shove their immorality in people's faces and then try to claim that they were born this way or that way and it's not their fault. Some people may fall for that, but not every person is that gullible.
