They can say they want to be able to marry multiple wives or have sex with kids, doesn't mean they are going to be able. Its not like that is anything new. And as mentioned many times in this thread, they are completely different cases, and have nothing to do with this.
Well, I'm not the one that doesn't know that judicial review was not a power that was afforded to the Supreme Court in the constitution or the bill or rights, or any other amendment since. As I pointed out 10 pages back, the Supreme Court gave themselves that power in 1803. That doesn't make it constitutional. So, when you quote wiki as a source, and that source is actually contradictory to the constitutional role of the Supreme Court, it kinda makes you sound uneducated on the subject.
Aside from pedophilia, I can see no difference between gay marriage and polygamy or consenting, of age, incestual relationships. So you feel it's ok to limit their rights, but not those of gay people? Please explain.
I believe you are the one who needs to read back 10 pages. Or 8. Or 6. And so on, because this topic has been covered over and over, and its the beginning of the circle ones again that will get your side of the debate no where, once again. I have answered that many times. So I don't need to explain, you need to read if you want the answer.
In the crap you posted that I wasted my time reading I never saw anything regarding Marbury v. Madison. I simply stated that the Supreme Court does actually have our votes behind it since we elect the Senators that confirm the Judges that made the decision that has you so Butt Hurt. If you knew anything about the Supreme Court you would know that Marbury v. Madison was the second time the Supreme Court did this. The Supreme Court confirmed the inferred constitutional authority for judicial review in 1796 in Hylton v. The United States. Thanks for trying to screw up History 10 pages back, kinda makes you sound uneducated on judicial review:/
I actually was aware of the first case, but the second was the one that they have derived their power from. Hence why I quoted that particular case. It would appear you are the one that is "butt hurt" as you so eloquently put it. Now your trying to teach me about the constitution and the supreme court from your 5 minute Google search. Thanks but no thanks. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/07/06/state-silences-bakers-who-refused-to-bake-cake-for-lesbians.html Here we go!
That is an old case...but I am 100% on the side of the baker. The baker should have the right to refuse service. That courts got that one wrong.
Yes, the bakery case is old but, the court order to silence the owner's breaking the 1st Amendment isn't.
Do straight people not file ridiculous law suits...and win them...every day? As he said, they are old cases, so clearly they didn't need this ruling to file ridiculous suits. That's the American way these days. Spill coffee...law suit. Be killed in self defense...law suit. Have a vag and get smiled at by a guy at work...law suit. Straight people do it, don't act like this is a gay thing. Or act like its something new.
I don't think that he meant that "every" LGBT person is out to file a lawsuit but I think that he meant that this speaks to the element within the gay community that seeks to push their agenda and acceptance into areas they have traditionally not been accepted and one example of that is churches and or their parishioners and their businesses. I don't think that is was an accident that they chose that particular bakery, I think there was intent to prove a point. You are naïve if you don't think there is an element of the LGBT community that has an active agenda to persecute/prosecute people/groups that don't believe what they are doing is correct. The question that we will have to answer as a society is whose rights will supercede the others. Will freedom of religion be trumped by equality provisions in the constitution. I feel that is the legal battle that will be waged and ultimately decided by the courts in some manner at some point in the future.
But what does that have to do with gay marriage being legal in 50 states now? Again, its an old lawsuit. So clearly, they have been, and will continue to fight for their freedom, including filing lawsuits. That's no different now then it was then. Why continue to fight to hold them back, when that's clearly the extent they are willing to push things for their right? Why not just give them their rights and leave them alone? I don't agree with dumb lawsuits like these. I agree they are wrong and am not defending the law suits. But straight people do it all the time, every single day. Why cant they? If you have a problem with these lawsuits, and them winning tem, the issue lies without the justice system. Not marriage. Has nothing to do with it.
I'm sure it's because they are on a movement currently for their right to be married in the eyes of the government (which I agree fully that they should have that right)... but it annoys me when people act like the vocal portion of the LGBT community is proportional to other groups. Maybe I've just met the wrong crowd, but it isn't a "vocal minority", in my experience it is more of a silent minority and vocal majority. I don't care what you do (or who for that matter), just quit being so outwardly abrasive about it. It's disgraceful to project a rainbow on the White House. If you want to be thought of as normal then quit going on the warpath anytime someone doesn't agree with you. It's annoying and tiresome. I'm Christian, I view homosexuality as a sin and it does make me uncomfortable to see two guys swap spit. Just the truth of the matter. I shouldn't be thought of as a bigot or weird for that. That said, I've actually had gay roommates before, continue to have gay friends, and adamantly agree that they should be able to be legally married. I don't look down on them for being gay, just as I don't look down on people for being liberal, non hunters, black, muslim, and the list goes on... They are just different than me.
My point exactly, were these Christians bothering this gay couple about to get married? If they don't want to serve you or agree with you, go to another bakery. That cake cost them $135,000 dollars, their business, and a gag order on their 1st Amendment rights. If you want to have a gay marriage, do so without making a case about it. I totally agree, they were probably set-up to get a point across. Go ahead and live life how you want, just don't drag me along for the ride if I don't agree, is the point. I know there are ridiculous lawsuits everyday by every religion, sex, and race but, sometime it has to stop. We are now at the point of losing freedom to gain freedom, I wish it wasn't that way but, it is.
