demented, delusional, mentally ill ... new word for prior becomes ‘gay’
The SCOTUS has been preempted by the Marxists. JMHO
US Christians will be persecuted but it will be done by the gays then the IS
AND not being lonely! Don't forget that. That alone justifies trashing the Constitution and abandoning the Rule of Law, doesn't it?
President Reagan chose this guy so apparently he must be different on the outside of the court. Reagan obviously thought he was the right man for the court (yes I know it was after Bork).
I’m going to make a prediction. Now that homo marriage is legal as far as the government is concerned we are going to obtain some very interesting metrics in states like Texas that have open records acts. Here is how it will work, at some point in time very soon those that issue marriage licenses for the government will notice something after the initial fervor dies down. They will notice that a very small number of people obtaining marriage licenses are of the same sex. In fact, it will be so small that the homo activists will call for taking the “sex” indicator off the marriage license application. Why? Because the mathematics will show everyone that a tiny percentage of the population has been browbeating the vast majority for decades.
In some parts of the country people that like to count things will find that there are no home marriages being performed.
The bottom line is that the homosexuals have not only come out of the closet they have come in to the light of day and at the end of the day we will find that except for the areas where there are large homo populations there will be very few same sex marriages. The American people are going to find out what many of us already know, a small group of activists have been scamming everyone for 40+ years.
My prediction. You read it here first.
The Supremes have become so politicized as evident by all the 5-4 decisions, that is is virtually no judicial, other than the weight it carries by being the institution it is. Judicially is supposed to be fair and impartial. No longer is this court that. The politicization of the court starts with the President, and both sides are equally guilty. The question in light of the effort to revise the tyrannical federal government, how best to regain the impartiality the SCOTUS “SHOULD” be. Change the appointment by a neutral body? but who would make THAT up? Maybe the states with one vote each should confirm Supreme court Justices taking it out of the hands of the corrupt US Senate.
Does Kennedy have a GAY child??
Breyer has no morals.....neither does Ruth Buzzy Ginnberg, or the Lesbisna Kagan.......guess they are such liberal Jews they don't believe in God anymore. And Sotomayer is.....not sure WHAT that is.
Just a quick question: Is there, or how many of them are gay? Or have a family member that is gay?
This might be the fodder behind their vote....
..... Now that emotions such as self esteem etc are worded in this have been listed in this law .... does it now mean that this law will be referenced to begin to Federally mandate the right not to be offended by others etc?
we just can’t win, he was appointed by RR.
You want the Constitution. You got the Constitution. That means separation of Church and State. All Churches have the difficult task of living within a system of separation of Church and State. The State is the final arbiter and their doctrine is the Constitution. In the Constitution the position of freedom of the person predominates. The Churches have groups - man and woman. Churches can say man and woman for marriage but the State says each person. If we want one man and one woman then we have to amend the Constitution.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
We’ve known that the SC is a political institution since FDRs time. Yet, no GOP strategy has been invented to get around Democrat obstinacy in appointing a conservative. We have to appoint a stealth candidate who later turns out to be a lefty because they control the academes and the ABA. Yet the left gets to appoint radicals even Obama’s latest appointments were unopposed and there was no filibuster against them.
Obama admitted that he’d appoint a Souter or a Breyer himself. The list that Obama perused and considered for appointment is a who’s who of liberal jurisprudence, much of it radical. We knew that Sotomayor and Kagan weren’t going to issue legal opinions, but political ones. Yet they get the votes. Why?