Colorado AG expects fire from both sides in defending gay marriage ban

Aug 4, 2014 Full story: Denver Post 12

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers has learned not to flinch when an unpopular stance lands him in the cross hairs.

Full Story

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#1 Aug 4, 2014
While I agree with his thought process that the full legal process needs to play out, I also think that some issues are more obviously and blatantly unconstitutional than others.

You simply cannot, under our constitution, carve out a special group of people for unequal treatment because a different group doesn't like them. That doesn't work. There's just no way to support such laws.

Since: May 14

Location hidden

#2 Aug 4, 2014
While i agree that this issue is hard to defend, he is at least being consistent and defending everything. Lets just be patient and let the legal process exhaust itself.

Lets imagine the unlikely scenario that SCOTUS says bans are ok, at least he did not create a class of people in legal limbo as their marriages may no longer be valid.

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#4 Aug 4, 2014
eJohn wrote:
While I agree with his thought process that the full legal process needs to play out, I also think that some issues are more obviously and blatantly unconstitutional than others.
You simply cannot, under our constitution, carve out a special group of people for unequal treatment because a different group doesn't like them. That doesn't work. There's just no way to support such laws.
agreed.
I almost hate to keep posting this because it certainly isn't spam, but here's what SCOTUS said when people voted limits on certain civil rights for children:

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette 1943 (SCOTUS Majority Opinion)
"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”
****
Is Marriage is a Federal Right?

Amendment IX [Non-Enumerated Rights (1791)]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

AMENDMENT XIV SECTION 1.
“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws….”

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#5 Aug 4, 2014
I find it hysterically funny that after a FEDERAL LAW about SSM is struck down a year ago some people are still trying to claim this isn't a Federal Issue.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#6 Aug 4, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
But it HAS worked for more than 200 years.
But the brilliant part about our constitution is that, eventually, all wrongs will be righted, at least where they can be righted by legislation. Some things take longer than others to right. We had slavery in this country for nearly 300 years before it was finally done away with.

"All in good time, my dear. All in good time." -The Wicked Witch of the West, "The Wizard of Oz."

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#7 Aug 4, 2014
DNF wrote:
I find it hysterically funny that after a FEDERAL LAW about SSM is struck down a year ago some people are still trying to claim this isn't a Federal Issue.
Even better--it WASN'T a Federal issue until the BIGOTS made it one!!!

Buw-WAAAAHHH!!!! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

Don't you just LOVE it??? The Federal DOMA literally paved the way for our equal rights being recognized. Ta-dah!!
Ex Senator Santpornum

Philadelphia, PA

#8 Aug 4, 2014
"Colorado AG expects fire from both sides in defending gay marriage ban...."

Because he's too incompetent, impotent and stupid to defend it well, or at least vigorously?

Is that why the bigots whose position he'll be defending will be firing brickbats at him?
Straight Laced

United States

#9 Aug 4, 2014
Ex Senator Santpornum wrote:
"Colorado AG expects fire from both sides in defending gay marriage ban...."
Because he's too incompetent, impotent and stupid to defend it well, or at least vigorously?
Is that why the bigots whose position he'll be defending will be firing brickbats at him?
I'd rather be known as a bigot than a fa ggot, dough boy.
Ex Senator Santpornum

Philadelphia, PA

#11 Aug 4, 2014
Straight Laced wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd rather be known as a bigot than a fa
There's no need for you to choose since you're both, closet case.

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#12 Aug 4, 2014
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Even better--it WASN'T a Federal issue until the BIGOTS made it one!!!
Buw-WAAAAHHH!!!! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!
Don't you just LOVE it??? The Federal DOMA literally paved the way for our equal rights being recognized. Ta-dah!!
Yup

And not to sound arrogant but I've been saying that ever since the Federal DOMA passed.

I wasn't alone.

here's something you'll find amusing:
How 'Palin Of The South' Went To War With Nonpartisan Data Politics Site
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/lenar-w...

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#13 Aug 4, 2014
Straight Laced wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd rather be known as a bigot than a fa ggot, dough boy.
I've got some BAD NEWS FOR YOU.

You're only known as a schmuck*.

*that part of the foreskin discarded after circumcision IOW a useless piece of dick.
Sir Andrew

Honolulu, HI

#14 Aug 4, 2014
As an attorney, he should be able to review the laws under attack to make his own determination of their constitutionality. Thus, finding a law that conflicts with that document, he should then determine that it is not worth his time and energy nor the taxpayers' money to pursue a defense. That's part of why he was hired by the people.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Locked And Loaded: Thank God These 'Good Guys' ... 11 min be a man 54
FOX&#x27;s Resident Windbag Claims Prez&#x... 15 min caesar 2
Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second ... (Nov '13) 35 min freeloading obama... 11,845
Elk restoration plan is moving forward with the... 16 hr dried 4
Comfortably Numb: The Navy Yard shooting rampag... (Sep '13) 16 hr Enough already 3
Eric Frein manhunt turns up explosives Sun Tory II 27
Expert discusses concealed carry on college cam... Sun Tory II 1

Guns People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE