Reply With Quote
Supreme Court to decide this session?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/18/justic...html?hpt=hp_t1
Supreme Court to decide this session?
There's no way it is cons utional. None. Christians need to get over it already and look to their Bibles:
Romans 13:10
Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
Why not just let marriage be a state and local issue?
Boner and Repugs made it a Federal issue.
It automatically becomes a federal issue, by cons ution. At least I believe that is the interpretation.
Article. IV.
Section. 1.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Section. 2.
The Citizens of each State shall be en led to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
Because the cons ution provides every citizen with equal protection above the rights of states.
'zactly.
'sceptin s.
Why involve government in marriage at all?
That's what we need to do. Get government out of marriage, and other aspects of out private lives.
The solution lies in the government, both federal and state, getting out of the marriage business. All unions at the state and fed level should be considered a civil union. Marriages should be rituals performed in churches. If you belong to a gay church and you are wed under the beliefs of that church, then so be it. To do this any other way will always infringe the religious beliefs of one over another. By the government not recognizing anything but civil unions it fixes the cons ution issue, as well.
"By the government not recognizing anything but civil unions it fixes the cons ution issue"
The French laugh at this American childish theatre. They get married in Church (or not), which isn't recognized and then get married before a civil authority for legal recognition. Everybody's happy, God and Caesar.
Oh good. Something else the french think that I don't give a flying about.
big win for some of you guys in this thread
this. marriage is a religious ins ution.
The legal fences around marriage, ie taxes and benefits seem to pull the Fed into the process.
Yeah. It is a widespread cultural ins ution. I can see the necessity given the joint raising of children.
Yup. Its a big win for any American who supports equal rights.phobic child.
Why not just let slavery be a state and local issue?
sexual obese sycophantYup. Its a big win for any American who supports equal rights.
you posture so much as being an macho alpha male that you come across as a weak beta sexual. if you weren't so blatant it wouldn't come across as as much of an act.
Try harder. Maybe it'll work!
marriage is a federal issue because of interstate marriages which are very common these days, and which would otherwise be impossible due to the discrepancies of marriage laws between different states.
The only reason why s want to be able to get married is because of money. They want the same tax breaks and handouts that straight married couples. It's not about equality. If it was about equality, s would support polygamy. s are just butt hurt(yep, I said it) because they are not getting tax breaks, handouts, and benefits from Uncle Sam.
I laugh when people use the "slavery should be an issue for the states" argument when someone says that marriage and abortion should be left up to the states. Slavery would never get on a ballot in America, .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
