With Our Victory Of Roe Being Overturned, Next Target--Same Sex Marriage!

[SweetSue92]

You can have three wives and cheat on all three. You can build your wealth by bilking investors and banks. You can steal from the elderly at your fake university. You can build massive cathedrals for gambling. You can hold contests of the flesh and burst into the dressing rooms of underaged girls to catch them naked. You can bear false witness against your opponents on a daily basis.

But if you bake a cake for TH3 GAYZ, Jesus is going to send you to hell.

What on earth are you ranting about now?

 

[Dragonlady]

Abortion is not a human right, you dumb fucking ****.

It is an ELECTIVE medical procedure. Except in very, very rare cases.

Now STFU, and ask your boy Trudy to give you some morning after pills

My body, my right. God gave ME, free will. No man has the right to take it away.

I live in a country where abortion is a medical decision I make with my doctor. There are no laws governing it.

You live in a country which enslaves women to their biology and removes the right of free will. You are neither the home of the brave, nor the land of the free.

This is shameful.

 

[SweetSue92]

Why are people even discussing these two issues in the same breath?

Roe v Wade TAKES AWAY the most vital right a person can possibly have - the right to even live.

Gay marriage EXTENDS rights, instead, by offering gay people the same opportunities as straight.

Although I don't agree with everything here, solidly agree on your take on Roe v Wade. The right to life is obviously fundamental and of primary concern

 

[SweetSue92]

My body, my right. God gave ME, free will. No man has the right to take it away.

I live in a country where abortion is a medical decision I make with my doctor. There are no laws governing it.

You live in a country which enslaves women to their biology and removes the right of free will. You are neither the home of the brave, nor the land of the free.

This is shameful.

The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body

 

[Dragonlady]

The next target should be to declare marriage a private matter, not for Government to administer.

Then there will be no marriage because no one would marry. It it the legal benefits marriage confers that make it worthwhile.

 

[Dragonlady]

The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body
The baby's body is not your body

The baby has no body. It's a blob of tissue and it has no rights.

If you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one. But you have no right to tell others how to live their lives.

 

[surada]

Hey look, I don't understand it but gay people exist. Some of them fall in love and want to live together as a couple. That is their business, so they should be allowed CIVIL UNIONS which grants them all legal benefits, but please don't call it a "marriage," as that is a union of a man and woman before God. So I don't see anywhere SCOTUS can address the issue; each state must decide.

Before God makes it a covenant or sacrament.. otherwise it's just a contract. Marriage is pretty old.. older than Judaism or Christianity.

 

[Flopper]

And Justice Clarence Thomas concurs. This degeneracy must end. It should be outlawed. God forbids it!

Same-Sex Marriage and Contraception Should Be Next on Chopping Block: Clarence Thomas

Clarence Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court should reconsidering same-sex marriage and contraception after striking down Roe v. Wade.

www.rollingstone.com

Possible but not likely. Thomas would vote to overturn it in a heart beat as he would all other court rulings and federal legislation that was not a clearly enumerated power of the federal goverment in the constitution.

Roe v Wade was overturn based on the right to privacy which was derived from the 14th amendment which in itself was a huge stretch. And equating the right to privacy to the right to kill ones unborn child is an even longer stretch. Thus the foundation for Roe v Wade was weak at best.

The SOTUS gay marriage ruling is very different. According to the Supreme Court, marriage laws that exclude marriage between two people of the same sex clearly violates due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. This is a much stronger basis for overturning marriage laws that block gay marriages than laws that forbid abortion. However even if the court overturned the gay marriage ruling, it would still be legal in over 40 states as the laws in most states were changed to allow gay couples to marry. In most states that did not change the marriage laws, it was just a matter of neglect rather than intent.

If gay marriage became illegal again if would create major problems related to healthcare, insurance, divorce law, child custody, etc..

In short, it ain't gonna happen.

 

[SweetSue92]

The baby has no body. It's a blob of tissue and it has no rights.

If you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one. But you have no right to tell others how to live their lives.

anti-science

 

[kaz]

The legal reasoning behind Loving and Obergefell are identical . You cannot argue against one and not the other

I destroyed that argument in post #188.

They are completely different

 

[kaz]

The next target should be to declare marriage a private matter, not for Government to administer.

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!

Government should treat all citizens the same. There should be no benefits or negative consequences for coupling

 

[Dragonlady]

Before God makes it a covenant or sacrament.. otherwise it's just a contract. Marriage is pretty old.. older than Judaism or Christianity.

Marriage is not a religious sacrament, it's a legal contract.

 

[surada]

Marriage is not a religious sacrament, it's a legal contract.

If you want it to be a sacrament you can get married in the Catholic Church, but you still have the marriage contract.

 

[kaz]

I support traditional marriage and at one time opposed same sex marriage...but it's done and the world didn't come to an end.

No one is being killed or injured by gay marriage...and while I'm never going to be a big fan... I'm not going to support ending it.

You do you... if it ain't hurtin' nobody, it ain't none of my business.

The issue with gay marriage is that it was implemented by judicial fiat. All the arguments supporting it should be directed to the legislature, not the courts.

As I pointed out in post 188, interracial marriage is not the same, it's a direct violation of equal protection

 

[Dragonlady]

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!

Government should treat all citizens the same. There should be no benefits or negative consequences for coupling

Governments reward behaviour they want. Marriage is the foundation of society. Couples having children are what allow us to go on so of course the government should be giving benefits to people having children. Your nation is in trouble because not enough people are having babies. You're not replacing your population.

 

[Dragonlady]

If you want it to be a sacrament you can get married in the Catholic Church, but you still have the marriage contract.

If there was no marriage license issued or registration of the marriage, would state divorce laws take effect?

 

[surada]

Governments reward behaviour they want. Marriage is the foundation of society. Couples having children are what allow us to go on so of course the government should be giving benefits to people having children. Your nation is in trouble because not enough people are having babies. You're not replacing your population.

The US population has doubled in my lifetime.

 

[kaz]

If you want it to be a sacrament you can get married in the Catholic Church, but you still have the marriage contract.

Calling marriage a "contract" is a misnomer. Contracts are agreed to by the parties, not an outside force. And the marriage contract continues to change, again without the say of the people in it.

It's not a contract. No business person like me who has negotiated many contracts would agree to such a contract ever.

But then you're wasting your time, arguing with a Canadian who knows nothing about our Constitution other than she's a leftist and she wants it ...

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Gay marriage EXTENDS rights, instead, by offering gay people the same opportunities as straight.

The next target should be to declare marriage a private matter, not for Government to administer.

Right throw the baby out with the bath water to avoid the thorny issues like privacy and equality. Then all you would have to do is figure out how, exactly you would disentangle marriage from government without pissing off a lot of people who enjoy the government benefits, rights, and security that legal marriage bestows . I have seen many try and fail.

I know, you are going to say private contracts. Well contracts are a legal instrument provided for in law so you still have government involvement. PLus, no private contract can compell any third party to reccognize the marriage. That is, unless there is a law stating that certain others must reccognize it . Oh but wait. There is goverment involvement again. But hey, give it a shot

 

[Ralph Norton]

My body, my right. God gave ME, free will. No man has the right to take it away.

I live in a country where abortion is a medical decision I make with my doctor. There are no laws governing it.

You live in a country which enslaves women to their biology and removes the right of free will. You are neither the home of the brave, nor the land of the free.

This is shameful.

Oh Canada ♪ ♫ ♪♪ ♫ ♫......