its amazing how the left lies about eveything. a. it should have been left to the states and the vote of the people. that is pro peoples rights... and anti big govt. its not even close to anti gay. b. the earth has warmed since the last ice age. and as the paper cited by nitro said co2 may contribute to the orbital forcings which have warmed the earth... co2 may not. we need more data and science to know if man made co2 causes warming. If you have peer reviewed science let us know. Of course you have not produced any for years... because none exists other than failed models. c. most of us do believe in aid to the poor. I give monthly. we just don't think you should be taxing us more... when the federal reserve already prints money like its water and floods the world with it. if you want to give more to the poor great. d. military action... many of us have realized our politicians are so corrupt we can't support military action... by this govt unless it is truly for self defense. that is an old time liberal postions... what is yours? e. drug laws... most of us libertarians think we should cease putting putting people in jail for soft drugs and support CA and Co telling the feds to jump in a lake. f. abortion rights... yeah killing a baby as it is being born is something to be proud of. babies have rights too... being in favor of killing a fetus no matter where it is in the cycle is not some sort of morally superior position. g. many of us believe taxes should be lowered. if you wish to raise taxes on the top .05% that is your call. how anyone with a brain thinks we need to raise taxes when we don't even know how much money the federal reserve creates is beyond me. until we know how much money is created... why not just spend it if you wish the govt to spend it... you don't need to raise my taxes... you have no idea how much inflation govt spending makes until you audit the money creators. h. we believe in science... you believe in a fake consensus. many of believe in conservation not govt cap and trade.
Huh? They followed the Constitution Precisely in Obergefell! What are you babbling about. The case turned on Constitutional issues!!! You learned in law school that those powers not given to the Federal Government in the Constitution are Reserved to the States. BUT, BUT, BUT, the Fourteenth Amendment is part of the Constitution. Any sentiment along the lines of "marriage regulation ought to be left up to the States" is TRUMPED by the Constitutional issue in this specific case!. You lose this one, Jem. Let's move on to something that's actually debatable. P.S. the Court is not obliged to follow a two "thousand a year-old institution" when doing so would caused severe harm to our Constitutional Rights. You're just going to have to accept the reality that in the U.S. the Constitution, like it or not, Trumps the Bible.
Jem, please don't cause me to call you an idiot. Of course Gay marriage is not in the constitution! Don't be silly.
" the Constitution does not top states rights" Well, that's true, because States Rights only exist so far as they are not in conflict with the Constitution! Where on Earth did you go to Law School? Every Law School in the Country that I am aware of teaches that where State laws are in conflict with the Constitution, the Constitution trumps State law. The U.S. Constitution, signed by representatives of the various States, states clearly that the Constitution is "the Supreme law of the Land." If you want to debate the Court and its Obama care decision, then there is room for spirited discussion. There isn't in the Gay Marriage issue. It is as straight forward an issue as will ever come before the Court. As you learned in Law School, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment forbids the Federal Government from favoring one religion over another. And the Fourteenth Amendment expands the Bill of Rights to the States and local governments. The only objections to gay marriage that can be raised, are raised on on religious grounds, and the Constitution protects us from laws based on religious grounds. (Although in practice it does a very poor job of providing that protection.) Furthermore, the objections raised on religious grounds are non-substantive, because no one can show harm from someone else's gay marriage. Thus any objection on religious grounds can not stand. Objections based on tradition are also non-substantive for the very same reasons. They too, can not stand against the substantive constitutional issues. A mind is a terrible thing to lose, Jem. Try to find yours, will'ya?
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Otherwise, show me the definition of marriage in the Constitution.
You have to move to Utah for that. That's why Mormons are increasing their numbers all over the world.
If Justice Kennedy wanted to show compassion and dignity for homosexuals, why did he give ISIS a reason to murder them? ISIS ‘Celebrates’ SCOTUS Decision by Tossing 4 Accused Gay Men Off Roof Breitbart National Security, by Michael Lucchese Original Article