Trump criticizes SC decision on homosexual "marriage" promises to appoint judges that will overturn!

[mdk]

Not merely procreation but a much larger and potent visceral issue: A child's right to both a mother and father trumps anyone else's constitutional rights. It's already in case law: Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

No, your interpretation of the finding is a figment of your imagination and isn't case law no matter how many times you cite it.

 

[Silhouette]

If procreation was a requirement for marriage, why issue marriage licenses to the elderly or the infertile?

Correct, the requirement for procreation is moot. The requirement to provide both the necessary mother and father isn't a moot point however...also applies to (grand)mothers and (grand)fathers. Whether or not children arrive in marriage isn't the point. It's that these rare exceptions don't create the thousands year old rule and reason marriage was invented: to provide boys with fathers and girls with mothers...children come in both genders..

A child's right to both a mother and father trumps anyone else's constitutional rights. It's already in case law at the USSC level. If a person's constitutional right harms children physically or psychologically, they may not exercise that right... (gay marriage strips children of even the hope of a mother or father FOR LIFE...which is the same as psychological prison for life without the possibility of parole..): Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

 

[Preacher]

If its sole goal is the destruction of the family unit the indoctrination to open children up to "alternative lifestyles" to FORCE businesses to suit YOUR NEEDS and not follow their faith then yes they are a threat to civilized society.

The family unit is a construct that is in constant flux, but has always survived. Children will survive better than old fuddyduddiescsuch as you and your delicate sensibilities seem to have. And businesses are businesses, not arbiters of personal conduct.

Nope not a construct its quite simple. 1 mom 1 father and kids. Maybe a pooch or cat. Oh and faggots are people not dictators who get to dictate what someone's religion is and what parts they can use to deny them service the fags need to act like ADULTS and move along and find someone who wants their money.

Who has been caused to alter or abandon their religion due to unwarranted pressure from homosexuals? What form does this repression take?

The family unit was once father, mother, offspring, grandparents, uncles and aunts. Then a little thing called the Industrial Revolution happened and the Extended Family died to be replaced by the Nuclear Family. A constant state of flux. Your grasp of history is predictably weak.

And must you disrespect someone's sexuality? Has anyone disrespected yours, or are you really that immature? I'm guessing it's the latter rather than the former.

Really numb nuts? Oregon Bakers? Washington Florist? There were more I am trying to remember.Attacked for their religious objections. Its funny people used religious objections to joining the military but when it comes to faggots they can't. Just amazing. I am a NORMAL human being I am what nature INTENDED not a degenerate sexual pervert.

None of those merchants were attacked. Check your hyperbole at the door. Those merchants were approached by paying customers who desired the same high level of service every other customer receives. None of those merchants were forced, cajoled or threatened out of their churches.

And those churches are not Christian churches, they are places that twist and distort Christianity to serve an evil purpose. Those adherents to such churches are directly analogous to the Taliban. When 'faith' is used as a bludgeoning device, it no longer can be regarded as faith. Rather it can be regarded as blind, stupid hatred.

And, in my humble opinion, you are not normal but anchored in unrefined stupidity andf blind hatred.

They were FORCED to serve people they did not want to serve. Simple as that. The American ISIS aka LEFTARDS can't let people be ESPECIALLY if they say NO to one of the American ISIS favorite groups. Then its all out war on those that said NO.

 

[Nosmo King]

If procreation was a requirement for marriage, why issue marriage licenses to the elderly or the infertile?

Correct, the requirement for procreation is moot. The requirement to provide both the necessary mother and father isn't a moot point however...also applies to (grand)mothers and (grand)fathers. Whether or not children arrive in marriage isn't the point. It's that these rare exceptions don't create the thousands year old rule and reason marriage was invented: to provide boys with fathers and girls with mothers...children come in both genders..

A child's right to both a mother and father trumps anyone else's constitutional rights. It's already in case law at the USSC level. If a person's constitutional right harms children physically or psychologically, they may not exercise that right... (gay marriage strips children of even the hope of a mother or father FOR LIFE...which is the same as psychological prison for life without the possibility of parole..): Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

You're raising the issue that children have a constitutional right to have two parents? Where are such rights enumerated?

And what of blended families? Certainly parental rights have been expunged by divorce decrees.

And is there empirical data supporting your fears of a child growing up in a loving home without two ganders acting as parents? Or is this the new form of Gay bashing?

 

[Political Junky]

Trump is really whoring to the Fundamentalists.

 

[Nosmo King]

The family unit is a construct that is in constant flux, but has always survived. Children will survive better than old fuddyduddiescsuch as you and your delicate sensibilities seem to have. And businesses are businesses, not arbiters of personal conduct.

Nope not a construct its quite simple. 1 mom 1 father and kids. Maybe a pooch or cat. Oh and faggots are people not dictators who get to dictate what someone's religion is and what parts they can use to deny them service the fags need to act like ADULTS and move along and find someone who wants their money.

Who has been caused to alter or abandon their religion due to unwarranted pressure from homosexuals? What form does this repression take?

The family unit was once father, mother, offspring, grandparents, uncles and aunts. Then a little thing called the Industrial Revolution happened and the Extended Family died to be replaced by the Nuclear Family. A constant state of flux. Your grasp of history is predictably weak.

And must you disrespect someone's sexuality? Has anyone disrespected yours, or are you really that immature? I'm guessing it's the latter rather than the former.

Really numb nuts? Oregon Bakers? Washington Florist? There were more I am trying to remember.Attacked for their religious objections. Its funny people used religious objections to joining the military but when it comes to faggots they can't. Just amazing. I am a NORMAL human being I am what nature INTENDED not a degenerate sexual pervert.

None of those merchants were attacked. Check your hyperbole at the door. Those merchants were approached by paying customers who desired the same high level of service every other customer receives. None of those merchants were forced, cajoled or threatened out of their churches.

And those churches are not Christian churches, they are places that twist and distort Christianity to serve an evil purpose. Those adherents to such churches are directly analogous to the Taliban. When 'faith' is used as a bludgeoning device, it no longer can be regarded as faith. Rather it can be regarded as blind, stupid hatred.

And, in my humble opinion, you are not normal but anchored in unrefined stupidity andf blind hatred.

They were FORCED to serve people they did not want to serve. Simple as that. The American ISIS aka LEFTARDS can't let people be ESPECIALLY if they say NO to one of the American ISIS favorite groups. Then its all out war on those that said NO.

Those who said NO were breaking the law of the land. They hold the same ossified attitudes of lunch counter managers in the south during the early 1960s. They were not ATTACKED! Rather they were approached by paying customers expecting the same high level of service afforded to each and every other paying customer.

Merchants are not allowed to claim they will get cooties by serving customers. Unless those customers were causing a scene or acting unruly, the merchant is obliged under law to serve them.

Why is that so hard to wrap your addled mind around? We cannot have second class citizens of this nation because some idiot bigot says so. We are a better nation than what the lowest common denominator wants.

 

[bendog]

Trump is really whoring to the Fundamentalists.

And fundy's always find whores appealing. Later on, they can always blame the whore for tempting them. Harlots and gays.

 

[Debra K]

Trump criticizes Supreme Court for same-sex marriage decision

All ya need is ONE libtard judge to retire maybe that jewess Ginsberg!? This will help him with more conservative folks and people that know this is an issue for the states.

Odium. Dear Leader "The Donald" is giving you another picture of red meat to salivate over. Have you not observed his modus operandi? If not, perhaps you should listen. He admitted that he says stuff like "I'm going to build that wall" whenever he sees the enthusiasm of the pack dogs waning at his rallies. The dogs start cheering and “The Donald” laughs at them. He leads them to the blood and they lap it up. He also admitted—if he wins the nomination—then he’s going to change his shtick to appeal to a wider, more moderate demographic. If you think he actually means anything he says, then you’re drinking his kool-aid. If he is elected president, he will appoint liberal judges to the bench. He wasn’t a democrat all of his life for nothing …

 

[Seawytch]

The family unit is a construct that is in constant flux, but has always survived. Children will survive better than old fuddyduddiescsuch as you and your delicate sensibilities seem to have. And businesses are businesses, not arbiters of personal conduct.

Nope not a construct its quite simple. 1 mom 1 father and kids. Maybe a pooch or cat. Oh and faggots are people not dictators who get to dictate what someone's religion is and what parts they can use to deny them service the fags need to act like ADULTS and move along and find someone who wants their money.

Who has been caused to alter or abandon their religion due to unwarranted pressure from homosexuals? What form does this repression take?

The family unit was once father, mother, offspring, grandparents, uncles and aunts. Then a little thing called the Industrial Revolution happened and the Extended Family died to be replaced by the Nuclear Family. A constant state of flux. Your grasp of history is predictably weak.

And must you disrespect someone's sexuality? Has anyone disrespected yours, or are you really that immature? I'm guessing it's the latter rather than the former.

Really numb nuts? Oregon Bakers? Washington Florist? There were more I am trying to remember.Attacked for their religious objections. Its funny people used religious objections to joining the military but when it comes to faggots they can't. Just amazing. I am a NORMAL human being I am what nature INTENDED not a degenerate sexual pervert.

None of those merchants were attacked. Check your hyperbole at the door. Those merchants were approached by paying customers who desired the same high level of service every other customer receives. None of those merchants were forced, cajoled or threatened out of their churches.

And those churches are not Christian churches, they are places that twist and distort Christianity to serve an evil purpose. Those adherents to such churches are directly analogous to the Taliban. When 'faith' is used as a bludgeoning device, it no longer can be regarded as faith. Rather it can be regarded as blind, stupid hatred.

And, in my humble opinion, you are not normal but anchored in unrefined stupidity andf blind hatred.

They were FORCED to serve people they did not want to serve. Simple as that. The American ISIS aka LEFTARDS can't let people be ESPECIALLY if they say NO to one of the American ISIS favorite groups. Then its all out war on those that said NO.

The Civil Rights Act passed 50 years ago. You're a little slow in your outrage...

 

[Flopper]

The idea that Donald Trump could give a shit about whether gays have equal rights is hilarious.

Except that it isn't an equal rights issue. Two brothers can't marry so it should be obvious even to you that not all relationships are treated equally. People, yes. Relationships, no.

Why shouldn't 2 brothers be able to marry? Other than it creeps you out? What is the rational legal argument?

Yes, it would creep me out but I don't see a reason to prevent it now. So we are finally in agreement on something.

Inbreeding generally leads to decreased biological fitness of a population Forbidding marriages of family members is used to discourage it. There is a lot of evidence that inbreeding can increase the chances that offsprings will be affected by recessive or harmful traits.

The primary reason homosexual unions have been discourage over the centuries has been because people feared it would lead to a reduction in population. Thus religion. laws, and taboos were used as tool to prevent it.

Al the supporters of homosexual marriage have claim that procreation is irrelevant to marriage. Now you're admitting that it is relevant.

Liberals talk out of both sides of their mouths, as usual.

I made no such statement. I said,
"people feared it would lead to a reduction in population".

I think a more accurate statement than "all the supporters of homosexual marriage have claim that procreation is irrelevant to marriage" is most supporters believe procreation is one of many reasons people marry. Procreation is no longer the primary reason couples marry today.

 

[Debra K]

The idea that Donald Trump could give a shit about whether gays have equal rights is hilarious.

Except that it isn't an equal rights issue. Two brothers can't marry so it should be obvious even to you that not all relationships are treated equally. People, yes. Relationships, no.

False analogy (logical fallacy), Iceweasel. The state has a rational basis for prohibiting closely related persons from getting married. There is no rational basis for prohibiting gay persons from getting married.

 

[Flopper]

Trump is really whoring to the Fundamentalists.

Only as long as it will buy him votes. As far as I can tell, Trump has no real political ideology. He believes only in Trumpism.

 

[Debra K]

I think its a great move. A LOT of people don't think he is socially conservative enough....I had no worries especially when the ONLY thing he can about this is appoint a justice to the court..what they do then is up to them.

A 'lot of people' are wrong.

And as already correctly noted: it's a moronic move, Trump further reaffirms the fact that the social right has too much control over the GOP, that most republicans are hostile to the protected liberties of all Americans, and that if elected a republican president would pursue an authoritarian agenda seeking to violate the civil rights of women, gay Americans, and others perceived to be 'different.'

According to you the Constitution says whatever the Supreme Court decides it says. If some Trump appointed judges rule that homosexual marriage is not a constitutional right, who are you to argue with them?

"According to you the Constitution says whatever the Supreme Court decides it says. If some Trump appointed judges rule that homosexual marriage is not a constitutional right, who are you to argue with them?" - bripat

Well, isn't that what you are doing now? Who are you to say homosexual marriage is not a constitutional right, who are you to argue with them?
You left yourself wide open, numb nuts.

I don't claim the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of the Constitution as nimrods like Clayton do. Marriage isn't a constitutional right, so how can homosexual marriage one?

I didn't leave myself open at all. You are simply too stupid to understand my point.

The constitution secures ALL liberty interests, great and small, against arbitrary government deprivations. A liberty interest need not be listed (enumerated) in the Constitution to be protected. For instance, you have the right to wear your cap backwards and attend a county fair. You can't be deprived of that right unless the government has a rational basis to justify the deprivation. It appears that you're the one who is "simply too stupid" to understand our fundamental law.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The idea that Donald Trump could give a shit about whether gays have equal rights is hilarious.

Except that it isn't an equal rights issue. Two brothers can't marry so it should be obvious even to you that not all relationships are treated equally. People, yes. Relationships, no.

Why shouldn't 2 brothers be able to marry? Other than it creeps you out? What is the rational legal argument?

Yes, it would creep me out but I don't see a reason to prevent it now. So we are finally in agreement on something.

Inbreeding generally leads to decreased biological fitness of a population Forbidding marriages of family members is used to discourage it. There is a lot of evidence that inbreeding can increase the chances that offsprings will be affected by recessive or harmful traits.

The primary reason homosexual unions have been discourage over the centuries has been because people feared it would lead to a reduction in population. Thus religion. laws, and taboos were used as tool to prevent it.

Al the supporters of homosexual marriage have claim that procreation is irrelevant to marriage. Now you're admitting that it is relevant.

Liberals talk out of both sides of their mouths, as usual.

I'm not admitting it. Show me one state marriage law with a procreation requirement in it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump is really whoring to the Fundamentalists.

Only as long as it will buy him votes. As far as I can tell, Trump has no real political ideology. He believes only Trumpism.

The greatest is his running around the last few days sporting a Bible.

You know, it gets to the point where you wonder if Trump might just be doing the greatest production of performance art in history.

 

[g5000]

If procreation was a requirement for marriage, why issue marriage licenses to the elderly or the infertile?

Correct, the requirement for procreation is moot. The requirement to provide both the necessary mother and father isn't a moot point however...also applies to (grand)mothers and (grand)fathers. Whether or not children arrive in marriage isn't the point. It's that these rare exceptions don't create the thousands year old rule and reason marriage was invented: to provide boys with fathers and girls with mothers...children come in both genders..

Yeah, without the joint tax return and the child tax credit and Social Security survivor benefits, people would stop fucking! The human race would die out! We'd be extinct in weeks!

ZOMG!

 

[g5000]

Kids not having a mother and father end up ax murderers. Therefore, we not only need to ban gay marriage, we need to ban heterosexuals from getting divorced!

Children of divorces end up on food stamps and stealing hub caps and voting Democratic.

Th3 Gayz are ruining EVERYTHING!!!

 

[Flopper]

Trump is really whoring to the Fundamentalists.

Only as long as it will buy him votes. As far as I can tell, Trump has no real political ideology. He believes only Trumpism.

The greatest is his running around the last few days sporting a Bible.

You know, it gets to the point where you wonder if Trump might just be doing the greatest production of performance art in history.

I expect if he's nominated, he will go after democratic votes with liberal programs that would shock both parties. Republicans will stick with him because they will have no choice except Hillary. Expect the unexpected from Trump.

 

[Debra K]

The idea that Donald Trump could give a shit about whether gays have equal rights is hilarious.

Except that it isn't an equal rights issue. Two brothers can't marry so it should be obvious even to you that not all relationships are treated equally. People, yes. Relationships, no.

Why shouldn't 2 brothers be able to marry? Other than it creeps you out? What is the rational legal argument?

Yes, it would creep me out but I don't see a reason to prevent it now. So we are finally in agreement on something.

Inbreeding generally leads to decreased biological fitness of a population Forbidding marriages of family members is used to discourage it. There is a lot of evidence that inbreeding can increase the chances that offsprings will be affected by recessive or harmful traits.

The primary reason homosexual unions have been discourage over the centuries has been because people feared it would lead to a reduction in population. Thus religion. laws, and taboos were used as tool to prevent it.

Al the supporters of homosexual marriage have claim that procreation is irrelevant to marriage. Now you're admitting that it is relevant.

Liberals talk out of both sides of their mouths, as usual.

Try be rational, if that's possible for you. Incest is still unlawful. The ruling that same-sex couples have the same right to marry enjoyed by opposite-sex couples did not have the effect of condoning or decriminalizing incest.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Except that it isn't an equal rights issue. Two brothers can't marry so it should be obvious even to you that not all relationships are treated equally. People, yes. Relationships, no.

Why shouldn't 2 brothers be able to marry? Other than it creeps you out? What is the rational legal argument?

Yes, it would creep me out but I don't see a reason to prevent it now. So we are finally in agreement on something.

Inbreeding generally leads to decreased biological fitness of a population Forbidding marriages of family members is used to discourage it. There is a lot of evidence that inbreeding can increase the chances that offsprings will be affected by recessive or harmful traits.

The primary reason homosexual unions have been discourage over the centuries has been because people feared it would lead to a reduction in population. Thus religion. laws, and taboos were used as tool to prevent it.

Al the supporters of homosexual marriage have claim that procreation is irrelevant to marriage. Now you're admitting that it is relevant.

Liberals talk out of both sides of their mouths, as usual.

Try be rational, if that's possible for you. Incest is still unlawful. The ruling that same-sex couples have the same right to marry enjoyed by opposite-sex couples did not have the effect of condoning or decriminalizing incest.

They throw out the incest slippery slope card all the time, not realizing that a brother/sister marriage,

being opposite sex monogamy, is closer to unrelated opposite sex monogamy, what they call 'traditional marriage', than it is to same sex marriage.

And, they think a father/daughter marriage would be an abomination - mainly because of concern for offspring,

and yet a disturbing number of them do not want a daughter raped by her father to have access to an abortion.