Posted on 10/18/2012 9:09:23 AM PDT by massmike
exactly
homosexuals have every right as us, there is not one right they do not have which we have.
They can marry the opposite sex just as we can, we can;t marry the same sex just as they can;t, we can;t marry more than one person at once just as they can;t.
What frigging dopey lawyer was on our side for this and who were the judges?
Liberalism is a mental disease, it really is.
This is all based on sex, that’s it, how they get off.
Some say on our sdie that the homosexuals agenda is nothing, I’ve seen libertarians on here say that they have no problem with a grown man marrying his little daughter, we truely live in a sick country today and our side like Hannity won;t even mention social issues and yet THE LEFT ALWAYS FIGHTS FOR THEIR SOCIAL ISSUES,.
The elite intellectual crowd tends to conveniently forget that not all laws are equal and or even legitimate whether they be passed by a legislative body or pulled out of thin air by a judge.
There is common law -laws not centrally planned; often with no rational basis -laws historically proven successful that evolved in a society promoting the common good -laws coming out and adopted having emanated from the free marketplace of ideas.
The elite intellectual crowd also tends to discount if not completely ignore the laws that are by default premised upon the inalienable authority that is above government -God the Creator. No rational basis is the battle cry of the leftist elites who plank by plank attempt to dismantle proven tradition and institution for their supposed rationally derived and centrally planned utopia.
So exactly what is marriage?
At the time civil registration was created it was considered a great advance in civil liberties.
It's gotten better, but we still have a lot of fascist stuff they instituted that stands in the way of progress.
I think he did the prayer and counseling bit on it and gave up.
Surely you jest. Everyone knows Roberts upheld Obamacare because the law was passed by representatives elected by the people. "It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices." (In other words, the Constitution doesn't matter; elections do.) Therefore, DOMA will be upheld. /sarc
You sound like a guest at the party in Alice & Wonderland, over the non-issue.
Also, why do you continually misrepresent Mitt Romney's actions in relation to "same-sex" marriage?" If he went along with certain things in Leftist Massachusetts, that does not mean that he does not mean what he says in the present race. Obama is the candidate who has endorsed the oxymoron--for t hat is what the very concept of "same-sex marriage" is.
William Flax
So what are you talking about?
I despise the direction our country is heading.
BTW, polygamy is usually adopted in societies where fertile women are in short supply. The rich guys get the women, and the poor guys get to share the leftovers.
William Flax
Whether this court is correct or not doesn’t really matter. If America and Americans are relying on the DOMA to preserve marriage, we’re utter fools.
The Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God won’t accept law as a substitute for morality. (That’s on practically every page of the Bible.) If we think passing a law relieves us of responsibility, this court has done us a favor by disabusing us of that notion.
Little Richard was a homo?
DOMA doesn't violate the equal protection clause, because DOMA is applied equally to all Americans. (It's not as though some classes of people are allowed to engage in homosexual unions, and other's are not.) The law says that the US government recognizes that all Americans can marry one person of the opposite sex. This means that homosexuals have the same rights as all other Americans since all Americans can marry someone of the opposite sex. Same sex couples just choose not to exercise that right. Since the law is applied equally to all Americans it does not violate equal protection.
Striking down DOMA on the grounds of equal protection is absolutely absurd. Following this court's crazy logic, incestuous and polygamous marriage will have to be upheld as well because not permitting them also would violate equal protection as described by this court.
You have a good point, but if we count bi-sexuals or those who recreational fudge packers and rug munchers I would bet the total is more like 20%.
Actually Polygamy is a problem in this country but it is underground so to speak., muslims and other religions accept it and do it.
In Canada right now there is a suit about this and I read on here though I have nio time to fund t that a suit has been filed in a state , not sure which one it is but it was out west.
What this decision has done and it;s a stupid activist decision is that marriage is anything.
Thye have the same rights as us, and what defines homosexuals is that they like sex and get off sexually with the same sex,.
So based on that they think special laws should be applied and I;m sure the foudning fathers would not have done special laws based on how one has their sex and if they thought this sick act would have been a problem as it is now then they would have dealt with it in the constitution
We don’t have any lawyers, dopey or otherwise, on our side anymore — the justice department is actually AGAINST the laws of our country on this issue, advocating for them to be overturned.
We don’t have any lawyers, dopey or otherwise, on our side anymore — the justice department is actually AGAINST the laws of our country on this issue, advocating for them to be overturned.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.