SCOTUS legalizes Gay Marriage - 10th Amendment Obliterated

[Sola_Fide]

Yes and yes. Congress' act to allow Utah into the Union was contingent on its banning polygamy. Thus Utah has very strict laws banning polygamy.

That's discrimination.

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

I never knew gay marriage was ever illegal to begin with. What they actually want are gay marriage licenses and to force people to marry them even if they don't agree with their lifestyle. Yay freedom

 

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

That's discrimination.

So is buying Wal-Mart GreatValue toilet paper instead of Charmin.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

How can the Supreme Court possibly say the Constitution makes a positive argument in favor of marriage? Marriage isn't even supposed to be a state institution. I can read the language of the Constitution, it CLEARLY says that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." I mean, this is pretty clear right? You'd have to be some kind of idiot not to see this. So the Supreme Court is objectively wrong. Do we just have to accept everything they say, no matter how ridiculous? If the Supreme Court said the Constitution allows for the banning of offensive speech, do we just accept their incorrect opinion?

--------------------------------------------------------

Try the following scenario:

Imagine you're playing a game of Poker, they turn over the River card, and it's an Ace of Spades. You leap out of your chair, "Yes, I won with a flush!" The other players at the table look at you in confusion. One of them speaks up, "What are you talking about, you'd need a Spade to make a flush."

You just stare at them and scratch your head, "It is a Spade though, the Ace of Spades!"

All around you they are just shaking their heads. "I see a two of Diamonds", "Yes, definitely a Two of Diamonds", "That's a Two of Diamonds". They look at each other, nodding in agreement.

You can't believe what you're hearing, you start to question yourself. Maybe it really is a Two of Diamonds? You look over at the card on the table. It's the Ace of Spades. The man next to you reaches for the pot and starts collecting it. You move to stop him. Everybody looks at you like you're crazy. "What are you doing? He won the pot with a low straight off the river card."

"But it's my pot, I won with a flush. Just look at the card for gods sake! What card is that?" You point to the Ace of Spades.

Someone picks up the card, examines it closely. "Yup that's a Two, clear as day." He's staring at you now like you're a mental patient loose from the asylum.

You grunt in frustration, angry now. You reach in and start pulling in the pot. "I don't care what any of you say! That's an Ace of Spades, and these are my chips!"

The man next to you puts his hand on your arm, tightening in a vicelike grip. His coat swings open, and you can see a powerful handgun tucked into a holster slung around his shoulder. You look at him, and he looks back with a deadly stare. Suddenly you understand. You know why they all thought you were crazy. You slowly sit down and look around at the tense faces in the room. "My mistake, I guess it is a Two of Diamonds."

-------------------------------------------

This is the denial of objective reality. 2+2=5, the sky is red, there are three halves in a whole, etc... The sad thing is, I can say all the crazy things I want, and if I have power or prestige, people will accept it.

 

[Jamesiv1]

You know, I really don't care what to dudes/duddets do in their bedroom. What I am troubled by is now that gays assuming have class status...does this mean that churches will be forced to marry them? I don't think a church should or should not be forced to do anything especially when it goes against their beliefs.

As long as the church accepts tax-exempt status, they will be 'encouraged' to comply.

Quid pro quo.

 

[juleswin]

So is buying Wal-Mart GreatValue toilet paper instead of Charmin.

So is the U.S. Govt having affirmative action favoring certain race and gender. But I guess that is cool with you cos that is just the exact same thing as me choosing between greatvalue and charmin toilet paper.

Discrimination is not cool when the govt is doing it.

 

[Sola_Fide]

So is the U.S. Govt having affirmative action favoring certain race and gender. But I guess that is cool with you cos that is just the exact same thing as me choosing between greatvalue and charmin toilet paper.

Discrimination is not cool when the govt is doing it.

Exactly. And all of those far out things like animal sex and pedophilia and polygamy are all going to be the new civil rights crusades because of this.

 

[juleswin]

Exactly. And all of those far out things like animal sex and pedophilia and polygamy are all going to be the new civil rights crusades because of this.

I'll ask you again, who is the victim in a gay or polygamous marriage?

 

[Sola_Fide]

I'll ask you again, who is the victim in a gay or polygamous marriage?

Why are you leaving out pedophilic arrangements and animal sex? You know that there are groups that want this as their right, correct?

 

[juleswin]

Why are you leaving out pedophilic arrangements and animal sex? You know that there are groups that want this as their right, correct?

I leave them out because consent matters and you can't really get consent or right a contract with a child or animal.

And seeing as we are talking about contracts and legal acts between adults, I see the talks about pedophiles and beastiality as distractions.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Despite setbacks like recent high profile arrest of one of the most influential human rights activists in US politics ('Gay' DNC Bundler, Founder of HRC Charged with Raping Boy , Town Hall-Nov 22, 2014), this is huge victory for gay marriage civil rights groups.

Won't be surprised if Civil Rights of consenting adults in Polygamy will be heard next by SCOTUS.


But the dgp got to be distraught as a "christian".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3_MqgeoD5Y




Related

What will be penalty/punishment for Churches/Mosques/Synagogues/Temples that refuse to marry gay couples?

 

[Sonny Tufts]

I can read the language of the Constitution, it CLEARLY says that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." I mean, this is pretty clear right? You'd have to be some kind of idiot not to see this. So the Supreme Court is objectively wrong.

You need to read the Constitution again. The 14th Amendment CLEARLY prohibits states from denying people due process and equal protection of the laws. It follows that these actions are "prohibited by it to the states", making the 10th Amendment irrelevant.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

or maybe why individual rights exist...

Individual rights exist for a Supreme Court to just make stuff up and pretend it exists in the Constitution, and re-write rights at will? I'm not following you here.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Huh?

What document bound the states to never ending, impossible to leave, "abusive relationship" with the FedGov?

Abraham Lincoln's opinion.

What document grants the clowns in gowns the power that they have?

Marbury v Madison, 1803.

 

[Sola_Fide]

I leave them out because consent matters and you can't really get consent or right a contract with a child or animal.

And seeing as we are talking about contracts and legal acts between adults, I see the talks about pedophiles and beastiality as distractions.

Yeah, that's the problem. You may see them as distractions, but these groups are being discriminated against and they see it as their civil right. Mark my words this is coming soon.

Secondly, we are running around the main issue. Contracts between consenting adults is not the problem. Government licensure is.

 

[Brett85]

Yeah, Rand ought to jump right into every contrived outrage ASAP. Best to get ahead of the 15 second attention span of the average American.

He's running for President. He can't just hide and not take a stand on issues. He's going to be asked about it and will have to give a position eventually. Now he'll just be criticized by the other candidates for not taking a strong stand on the issue.

 

[Brett85]

You need to read the Constitution again. The 14th Amendment CLEARLY prohibits states from denying people due process and equal protection of the laws. It follows that these actions are "prohibited by it to the states", making the 10th Amendment irrelevant.

Who knew that we've been violating the 14th Amendment for the 150 years that it's been around? Lol, it's such a joke to think that the authors of the 14th Amendment were thinking about creating a right to gay marriage when they authored the 14th Amendment.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

I am a little surprised by the responses here.

I guess the issue here is that some of us see people as people with rights based on us being 'men' or 'women'.
As humanity moves forward, the trend is to see gender definitions as outdated and rooted in a tradition that current generations don't belong to.
So really this is just about equality of access to institutions for two consenting adult individuals.

Sorry social conservatives, but the country is moving forward. There will be no civil war. There will be no secession.
The vast majority of the country, especially millennials, is okay with this. It sucks to be a minority, but that's just the way it is from here on out.

And for what it's worth, I don't understand the obsession with people thinking that homosexual couples are suddenly going to demand that cake makers start churning penis cakes. It's like saying, "If those darn heteros get to marry, they are going to start getting all the cake makers to have vagina cakes!" That just doesn't happen.

I hope Rand doesn't put his foot in his mouth on this one. It's going to be really interesting to see how this hits the GOP primary.

I am more than a little surprised. I couldn't possibly GAF about same sex marriage pro or against; but I DO GAF about the Constitution. I would be upset at SCOTUS requiring all 50 states to provide ice cream and lollipops too, as a violation of the separation of powers, and the checks and balances on federal power.

What's offensive to me about this ruling, has nothing to do with same sex marriage, but that SCOTUS has chosen to burn down one of the last remaining checks and balances on power.

I am astonished, frankly, that some 'libertarians' are okay with massive federal power grabs just so long as they like what comes out the other end...this time.

Some of you think you have 'won' by SCOTUS pissing on the Constitution here, but in reality the decimation of our human and civil liberties will now accelerate as a new precedent has been set.

It is only a matter of time, now, until we see federal hate speech laws requiring the States to punish people for unpopular opinions, and the advent of true thoughtcrime laws.

So yeah, y'all do your little celebratory dance, but in 8 years when you are getting hauled off to reeducation camps for criticizing police brutality, don't say you weren't warned about what would happen with this sort of power grab from the federal courts.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

When you give the government a power to use against your neighbor, you have no right to complain when that power is later used against you.

Aaaaand if I vehemently oppose giving any government a power to use against my neighbor, even when the outcome of said power might even be something I like?

 

[otherone]

I am more than a little surprised. I couldn't possibly GAF about same sex marriage pro or against; but I DO GAF about the Constitution. I would be upset at SCOTUS requiring all 50 states to provide ice cream and lollipops too, as a violation of the separation of powers, and the checks and balances on federal power.

^^^^^
THIS.

We have entered a nouveau-New Deal era.
The federal government has been making massive power grabs. ACA, TPP, etal...ice cream and lollipops will be in the form of federally monitored mileage and other more horrific authoritarianism. Meanwhile, any memory of possible resistance is being removed from the state houses because "racism". We live in a bureaucratic empire, not a republic.