Dorkington Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 Supreme Court rules gay couples nationwide have a right to marry The Supreme Court on Friday delivered a historic victory for gay rights, ruling 5 to 4 that the Constitution requires that same-sex couples be allowed to marry no matter where they live and that states may no longer reserve the right only for heterosexual couples. Equality is the only answer, bravo.
3rdnlng Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 How is this a federal issue? Where and when were they granted any say in the matter?
Chef Jim Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 How is this a federal issue? Where and when were they granted any say in the matter? When they created rules that benefit married couples.
3rdnlng Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 When they created rules that benefit married couples. Ah, I see. The feds can take over all aspects of our lives just by creating rules? Where in the Constitution does it give the feds any say in marriages? The feds are constitutionally granted certain specific powers and the remaining powers are left up to the state and local government. When and where is this schit going to stop? They're even now trying to stick their nose into local zoning, the phucktards.
BarleyNY Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 Ah, I see. The feds can take over all aspects of our lives just by creating rules? Where in the Constitution does it give the feds any say in marriages? The feds are constitutionally granted certain specific powers and the remaining powers are left up to the state and local government. When and where is this schit going to stop? They're even now trying to stick their nose into local zoning, the phucktards. Exactly how does marriage equality take over an aspect of your life? The State vs. Federal argument is incredibly weak here as people, including married couples, move temporarily and permanently from state to state. There's been too much issue with that not to settle things. The gubment out of marriage argument looks pretty sad both on its face (since there are a lot of legal reasons for it) and because of timing (where have all of you been the last couple hundred years?).
boyst Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 As I told a friends parents today who are extremely religious. I just want to be able to marry a good Christian woman in a ceremony blessed by God then divorce her and get a sex change, a TV show, and marry my son. Since I cannot, I feel oppressed.
DC Tom Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 Exactly how does marriage equality take over an aspect of your life? The State vs. Federal argument is incredibly weak here as people, including married couples, move temporarily and permanently from state to state. That's an even weaker argument. "Full faith and credit" applies, but only in states recognizing other states' marriage licenses (and all the state laws saying "We won't recognize gay marriages performed in another state" are rightfully unconstitutional.) That was never hindered in any way by states having different definitions of marriage. The only other argument that you could possibly be making is that it's covered under "regulating interstate commerce," which would be a truckful of bull **** if we hadn't already established over the past 10 years that damn near everything qualifies as "interstate commerce."
BarleyNY Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 That's an even weaker argument. "Full faith and credit" applies, but only in states recognizing other states' marriage licenses (and all the state laws saying "We won't recognize gay marriages performed in another state" are rightfully unconstitutional.) That was never hindered in any way by states having different definitions of marriage. The only other argument that you could possibly be making is that it's covered under "regulating interstate commerce," which would be a truckful of bull **** if we hadn't already established over the past 10 years that damn near everything qualifies as "interstate commerce." It's not a weak argument at all, at least not according to the SCOTUS. Feel free to respond to my other points.
DC Tom Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 It's not a weak argument at all, at least not according to the SCOTUS. Feel free to respond to my other points. I don't care who makes it, it's a weak argument. "Married couples moving from state to state" has never been an issue, precisely because it's covered by "full faith and credit." Using it as an excuse to force all states to define marriage the same way is egregiously mendacious, as it's either solving a problem that didn't exist, or not solving the problem at all (see my posts in the other thread.) I have no interest in responding to your other posts.
Rob's House Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) Food for thought: http://bearingarms.com/can-gay-couples-open-carry-ar-15s-washington-dc-result-obergefell/ Can Gay Couples Open Carry AR-15s in Washington, DC As A Result Of Obergefell? Edited June 29, 2015 by Rob's House
unbillievable Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Food for thought: http://bearingarms.com/can-gay-couples-open-carry-ar-15s-washington-dc-result-obergefell/ Licenses granted in one state must now be recognized in all states? Guns and Weed for everyone!!!
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Weed for everyone!!! I wish, that'd be about the only thing that could make this ridiculous world bearable.
B-Man Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 What Actually Comes Next by Erik Erickson Less than forty-eight hours after King Anthony sovereignly provided new theology for our secular, civil religion, the left is now publicly calling for the abolition of tax-exempt status for religious non-profits and churches. It will come. It has to come. If gay marriage is a fundamental right under the equal protection clause, it is going to trump a lot of the first amendment. As Chief Justice Roberts noted, King Anthony’s theology precludes “free exercise” of religion. But all of this is down the road a few years. Let me tell you what is going to happen first. Silence. A newspaper in Pennsylvania has declared it will no longer allow letters to the editor opposed to gay marriage because it is a fundamental right. BuzzFeed declared that, in its editorial position, there is no position other than support for gay marriage. Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, banned all apps from its store that display the Confederate flag. That had to be walked back a bit, but there you have it. The Los Angeles Times refuses to run letters pointing out that global warming is a scam. And now, Apple and Facebook are set to develop news platforms that will have a human curator, instead of a computer algorithm. Twitter, likewise, is engaging humans on trending news topics, etc. It is only a matter of time because Google works its algorithm magic to drive down links to those who oppose the new cultural agenda. So we will see orthodox Christian voices disappear from most news channels. The left are master propagandists. One of the chief tricks of the propagandist is to convince you that you are all alone. Everyone else thinks otherwise. So an Apple that celebrates gay rights and bans what it thinks is hate is only one step from prohibiting a Russell Moore piece through its news service. Twitter can declare support for traditional marriage to be hate and turn off accounts, mine included. Newspapers, radio stations, and television networks who long ago embraced the idea that people are born gay despite ample evidence to the contrary in most (but not all) cases, will reach further. If you are a talk radio show host who supports traditional marriage, get ready for your parent company to tell you that is no longer allowed. After all, it is a fundamental right. A CNN that was celebratory on its twitter feed after the gay marriage ruling can hardly be expected to allow on any pundit who dissents without treating that person as a contemptible bigot. MSNBC will run news stories on the rise in hate groups that, no doubt, the Southern Poverty Law Center ( a Hate Group in their own right) will list. That list will include all orthodox Christian churches. The left has worked very hard to control information. They will now work extra hard to push conservatives forcibly into a ghetto of thought. The overarching goal will be to convince you that no one agrees with you and there are no voices echoing you. http://www.redstate.com/2015/06/29/what-actually-comes-next/
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 What Actually Comes Next by Erik Erickson Less than forty-eight hours after King Anthony sovereignly provided new theology for our secular, civil religion, the left is now publicly calling for the abolition of tax-exempt status for religious non-profits and churches. It will come. It has to come. If gay marriage is a fundamental right under the equal protection clause, it is going to trump a lot of the first amendment. As Chief Justice Roberts noted, King Anthony’s theology precludes “free exercise” of religion. But all of this is down the road a few years. Let me tell you what is going to happen first. Silence. A newspaper in Pennsylvania has declared it will no longer allow letters to the editor opposed to gay marriage because it is a fundamental right. BuzzFeed declared that, in its editorial position, there is no position other than support for gay marriage. Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, banned all apps from its store that display the Confederate flag. That had to be walked back a bit, but there you have it. The Los Angeles Times refuses to run letters pointing out that global warming is a scam. And now, Apple and Facebook are set to develop news platforms that will have a human curator, instead of a computer algorithm. Twitter, likewise, is engaging humans on trending news topics, etc. It is only a matter of time because Google works its algorithm magic to drive down links to those who oppose the new cultural agenda. So we will see orthodox Christian voices disappear from most news channels. The left are master propagandists. One of the chief tricks of the propagandist is to convince you that you are all alone. Everyone else thinks otherwise. So an Apple that celebrates gay rights and bans what it thinks is hate is only one step from prohibiting a Russell Moore piece through its news service. Twitter can declare support for traditional marriage to be hate and turn off accounts, mine included. Newspapers, radio stations, and television networks who long ago embraced the idea that people are born gay despite ample evidence to the contrary in most (but not all) cases, will reach further. If you are a talk radio show host who supports traditional marriage, get ready for your parent company to tell you that is no longer allowed. After all, it is a fundamental right. A CNN that was celebratory on its twitter feed after the gay marriage ruling can hardly be expected to allow on any pundit who dissents without treating that person as a contemptible bigot. MSNBC will run news stories on the rise in hate groups that, no doubt, the Southern Poverty Law Center ( a Hate Group in their own right) will list. That list will include all orthodox Christian churches. The left has worked very hard to control information. They will now work extra hard to push conservatives forcibly into a ghetto of thought. The overarching goal will be to convince you that no one agrees with you and there are no voices echoing you. http://www.redstate.com/2015/06/29/what-actually-comes-next/ There's no doubt that social conservatism is looking pretty dead at the moment.
Rob's House Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 There's no doubt that social conservatism is looking pretty dead at the moment. Social conservatism is gay.
meazza Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 There's no doubt that social conservatism is looking pretty dead at the moment. I was cool with social conservatism until they started raiding the massage parlours.
LeviF Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Undoubtedly, there will be attacks on the free exercise of religion coming in a few years, if not sooner. Very real challenges to tax breaks and tax-exempt status for religious organizations as well. But I doubt it'll start with churches and mosques and temples. I think para-church organizations, like independent religious universities and independent charities with strong religious ties will see their government help dry up very quickly due to their core tenets and beliefs. I'm thinking something along the lines of what happened to Bob Jones University back in the 70's with their discriminatory admission policies, only on a massive scale the likes of which we haven't seen before.
Dorkington Posted June 29, 2015 Author Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) No one seemed to have an issue with government recognition of marriage (along with attached benefits) until same sex couples wished to be married as well. Interesting. Edited June 29, 2015 by Dorkington
unbillievable Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Undoubtedly, there will be attacks on the free exercise of religion coming in a few years, if not sooner. Very real challenges to tax breaks and tax-exempt status for religious organizations as well. But I doubt it'll start with churches and mosques and temples. I think para-church organizations, like independent religious universities and independent charities with strong religious ties will see their government help dry up very quickly due to their core tenets and beliefs. I'm thinking something along the lines of what happened to Bob Jones University back in the 70's with their discriminatory admission policies, only on a massive scale the likes of which we haven't seen before. Why should churches have a tax exemption? True equality means an equal sharing of miseries. No one seemed to have an issue with government recognition of marriage (along with attached benefits) until same sex couples wished to be married as well. Interesting. That's not exactly true. People started questioning marriage benefits when women began entering the work force, making the core idea of the tax benefits moot. As two income families became the norm, it's inherent "unfairness" became obvious to the growing number of unmarried (and single parents.) The LGBT community simply wanted to hop onto the gravy train before it stopped. Ironically, it may be their inclusion that finally ends the (tax) benefits.
Dorkington Posted June 29, 2015 Author Posted June 29, 2015 Why should churches have a tax exemption? True equality means an equal sharing of miseries. That's not exactly true. People started questioning marriage benefits when women began entering the work force, making the core idea of the tax benefits moot. As two income families became the norm, it's inherent "unfairness" became obvious to the growing number of unmarried (and single parents.) The LGBT community simply wanted to hop onto the gravy train before it stopped. Ironically, it may be their inclusion that finally ends the (tax) benefits. Where were all the anti marriage protests then?
Recommended Posts