9th Circuit Court of Appeals Successfully Petitioned to Re-hear Prop. 8 Ruling

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Silhouette, Feb 26, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As if we all don't already know, the USSC was referring to RACE.

    There was no mention of genital preference,and deviations, as a protected right, despite the asinine pretense of the Gay Guevaras to keep on pretending that the USSC was referring to their sexual peccadillos.

    Absolutely childish in its nonstop inanity.

    You genital preference is NOT = to race. Sorry. I know you desperately need to pretend otherwise, but that changes nothing.

    Put it before the voters...as often as you like...we'll CRUSH YOU...every time, except for one or two small, Northeastern states.

    WE, the PEOPLE, will define marriage as we see fit....
     
  2. rstones199

    rstones199 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,875
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63

    Race or genital preference, it does not matter.

    Separate is inherently unequal, hence separate (Civil Unions) is not equal (Marriage), per the SCOTUS in 1954.

    And as I stated before, in a republic a constitution will overrule the vote of the majority to enforce its tyranny on the minority each and every time.
     
  3. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I will call my marriage to my husband a marriage regardless of what you wish to forbid. Freedom of speech.

    I will of course acknowledge that I'm not able to do so in any official capacity. Apparently that's what you wish to forbid, though one wonders if you wouldn't go farther than that if able.

    Care to explain why the word alone is so important to you? If the rights are the same (and it's already been shown that they aren't at this juncture), then I see little point to withholding the use of the word. It's inefficient for the government to run parallel institutions.
     
  4. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Race or genital preference , it DOES MATTER; one (race), comprises a Constitutional protection.

    The other, comprises no such thing. Your preferred genitalia are not a protected right...

    Keep trying to disengenuously equate the two...it highlights the desperation of your position.

    There is no "tyranny", as gays are not being denied anything that anyone else has, in terms of ACTUAL RIGHTS, thanks to civil unions.

    It is the Gay Guevaras who seek to force a Tyranny of the Minority on the rest of us....we ain't havin' it.
     
  5. rstones199

    rstones199 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,875
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Does not matter one iota. These same argument that you are suing were the same exact bull(*)(*)(*)(*) arguments from back in the 60's on interracial marriage.

    The only reason you claim it matters is because of the creatures in your mind against homosexuality.
     
  6. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The Constitution is the highest expression of the will of the people - the Supreme law of the land.

    They have not done so in a way that overrides the Constitution's protections. Unless and until they do, you haven't a leg to stand on.

    Irrelevant in light of the the fact that they haven't overridden the protections guaranteed by the Constitution. I'll acknowledge that they could - but I think that would be a very sad day for this country.

    Why don't you know that the U.S. Constitution is the highest expression of the will of the people, and cannot be changed by amending a state constitution?

    Yes, I'm an American. Most of my family has been here since the colonial era. The latest arrivals came from Ireland in the 1830s, before the worst of the potato famines. How long has your family been in the United States?
     
  7. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Preferring your own type of genitalia for sex is not a protected right, under the Constitution.

    Neither is pretending otherwise.

    Society has the right to define marriage as we see fit....and we will continue to do so.

    Enjoy your civil unions,and give it a rest...
     
  8. rstones199

    rstones199 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,875
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63

    Preferring your own race for sex is not a right, under the Constitution.

    Neither is pretending otherwise.

    Society has the right to define marriage as we see fit....and we will continue to do so. It will be members only of the same race.

    Give desegregation a rest.
     
  9. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The 14th does not mention creed, nor any synonym thereof.

    The 14th does not mention "gender" nor "sex". It does use the word "male" in reference to voting rights and reduction of the apportionment of representation.

    Clearly you don't know what you're talking about.
     
  10. texmaster

    texmaster Banned

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    10,974
    Likes Received:
    590
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My family on my father's side came over in the 1600s. My mothers side in the early 1700s. Does that mean my opinion matters more? Of course not so stop the tasteless posturing.

    You want to be true to the Constitution? Seek an Amendment. If your family has been here that long you should already know this.
     
  11. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Race cannot be the basis for discrimination, under the Constitution.

    There is no such protection for sexual behavior.

    Keep trying to falsely equate the two, as it illustrates how desperate you and yours are to make that LIE "True", as you have NO OTHER BASIS for your argument....
     
  12. rstones199

    rstones199 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,875
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You do not understand that these same arguments that you are trying to use were used in the 1960's for interracial marriage.

    Simple takeout interracial and insert gay.

    Both are against the 14th amendment.
     
  13. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Still chafing about Lawrence v. Texas apparently.

    Not sure what you intended this to mean.

    Not when doing so violates the Constitution. You're welcome to disagree as to whether or not limiting marriage to opposite-sexes constitutes such a violation, but bold declarations such as the above don't make for convincing arguments.

    My state doesn't have civil unions. Civil unions aren't recognized by the federal government. Ergo, there is nothing for me to "enjoy".
     
  14. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The numbers come from the GAO, a non-partisan entity.
     
  15. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Except that race is not behavior, therefor your attempt at equivocation is nonsense.
    Don't believe me? Ask black Americans what they think about the sham attempt to cadge onto their civil rights struggle, by gays trying to equate their sexual prefernces with race:



    Blacks object to gay marriage comparison


    Changing Attitude, December 12th, 2003Be the first to comment

    In the USA, conservative blacks are objecting to recent comparisons between the gay marriage and civil rights movements, arguing that sexual orientation is a choice. Links between the two struggles were made when the Massachusetts highest court ruled that the state’s constitution guarantees gay couples the right to marry. The court cited landmark laws that overturned bans on interracial marriage.

    The Rev. Talbert Swan II said the two struggles are not similar because blacks were lynched, denied property rights and declared inhuman. “Homosexuality is a chosen lifestyle,” he said. “I could not choose the colour of my skin. … For me to ride down the street and get profiled just because of my skin colour is something a homosexual will never go through.” A poll indicated 60% of blacks opposed gay marriage..


    http://changingattitude.org.uk/archives/1371

    Your nonsense fools no one...
     
  16. rstones199

    rstones199 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,875
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    [​IMG]
     
  17. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63


    Once we've done that, should we contact the official spokesperson for Jewish and female American's next?​
     
  18. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It was tasteless to ask if I wasn't an American, as if it would somehow make my opinion inferior if I weren't.

    No amendment to the Constitution is needed; merely the just application of the protections already existing therein.
     
  19. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nonmsense. People are entitled to "equal protection under the law",and the rules for marriage are IDENTICAL for everyone.
    The States have the right to define marriage, and will continue to do so.

    There is NO Constitutional remedy for sexual preference, and no misguided opinion from an activist judge can change that.

    Civil unions confer the SAME RIGHTS, so there is NO wrong to redress...
     
  20. texmaster

    texmaster Banned

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    10,974
    Likes Received:
    590
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you weren't being tasteless you would have simply said you were an American. Your pathetic attempt to play who's family has been here the longest was tasteless and petty.

    Really. Please cite in the Constitution where it states that. Anywhere.

    Go ahead.
     
  21. rstones199

    rstones199 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,875
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    In 1954 the SCOTUS said that separate is inherently unequal, hence separate (Civil Unions) is not equal (marriage).

    Also, as shown before, when marriage was only within ones race, the rules for marriage were IDENTICAL for everyone. Another failed argument from you.
     
  22. rstones199

    rstones199 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,875
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Meore personal attacks...same old bull(*)(*)(*)(*) from you.



    14th amendment. Next
     
  23. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    This isn't what equal protection of the laws means. It isn't merely procedural, and there's a ton of case law interpreting its scope.

    You're welcome to your misguided opinion, and that's all it is.

    They don't. Blinding yourself to the inequalities already demonstrated isn't a persuasive argument.
     
  24. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BAsed on race.

    What Loving v Virginia ACTUALLY SAID:

    The first state marriage law to be invalidated was Virginia's miscegenation law in Loving v Virginia (1967). Mildred Jeter, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, had been found guilty of violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages and ordered to leave the state. The Court found Virginia's law to violate the Equal Protection Clause because it invidiously classified on the basis of race, but it also indicated the law would violate the Due Process Clause as an undue interference with 'the fundamental freedom" of marriage.


    No mention of sexual preference as a protected right included in the "fundamental freedom of marriage", which society has the power to define, and which the US Constitution grants the States the authority to enforce.

    Sorry. Keep on pretending that genital preference is the same as race...
     
  25. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no inequality in the law. You're welcome to keep pretending that special exception means "equal".


    Here is the Constitutional FACT regarding marriage:

    FURTHER COMMENT:

    Note that there is no right to marry or bear children included among any of the rights listed above. It is not a "natural" right, because natural rights are only rights of individuals, and exercise of a "right" to marry, without the consent of the other, would be an assault. Since consent is required, it is a matter of contract, and contractual rights are created by the community, even if it is a "community" of only two persons. Since the community is normally a larger polity, and since all legal contracts are agreements not only between the contracting parties, but also with the entire community, therefore the community has the power to regulate marriage and childbirth, and has exercised that power since time immemorial, for the benefit of the community.


    http://constitution.org/powright.htm


    Now, make up some more nonsense pretending that the civil rights of blacks, preventing racial discrimination, are "the same" as your preferred genitalia.

    AS I said, we will continue to CRUSH YOU at the ballot box, AS IS OUR RIGHT...

    No cure for stupid, unfortunately...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page