Supreme Court urged to support gay marriage limits

Jan 22, 2013 Full story: WTAX-AM Springfield 287

The Supreme Court was urged on Tuesday to uphold the constitutionality of two laws that define marriage as the union of a man and a woman, as it prepares to hear arguments in the historic same-sex marriage cases two months from now.

Full Story
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#29 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
Homosexuality is vile. Homosexuals are broken goods. I want to offend homosexuals. I hope I upsetm any homosexuals through my comments! Homosexuals hate God, and feel guilty, and want to mend themselves from guilt, because they never accept their parents never loved them, and are damaged unlovable goods. Does this offend you, homosexuals?
Shut up and kiss me you trash mouth brute

Since: Oct 12

Coolidge, AZ

#30 Jan 23, 2013
Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage establishes legal kinship
.
Blood relatives are already legally kin; so marriage is redundant
.
Considering how fundamentalists abuse their children; marrying the kids off to responsible adults is a brilliant idea; better than adoption
Marriage does far more than establish kinship. And blood relatives do marry, and it's perfectly legal and moral for them to do so.
Brad

Manchester, CT

#32 Jan 23, 2013
Still no jobs,failing economy,wars galore,illegals falling out of the woodwork,pathetic education system,massive debt and sky high gas,food and energy costs and we're worried about appeasing yet another special interest group?
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#33 Jan 23, 2013
Brad wrote:
Still no jobs,failing economy,wars galore,illegals falling out of the woodwork,pathetic education system,massive debt and sky high gas,food and energy costs and we're worried about appeasing yet another special interest group?
Whatever it takes to get equal treatment under the law; sugar
.
"Inequality anywhere is a threat to equality everywhere" - MLK Jr
Sgt Common Sense

Denver, CO

#34 Jan 23, 2013
Brad wrote:
Still no jobs,failing economy,wars galore,illegals falling out of the woodwork,pathetic education system,massive debt and sky high gas,food and energy costs and we're worried about appeasing yet another special interest group?
This could be over in ten minutes if the conservatives would just give same sex couples marriage equality.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#35 Jan 23, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
He isn't going to answer because he has no idea what the words really mean.
Notice, IT did respond, but doesn't deserve an answer.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#36 Jan 23, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you mean "ex post facto" ?
I'm not up on the legal terms......I do know that after reading both briefs that I found interesting that the proponents of Prop 8 truly have ignored the issue of the existing legal marriages of Same-Sex Couples and feel that if they don't have standing, then both the 9th's and Judge Walker's rulings should be vacated.

The rest of the briefs are pretty much the same stuff we've read about over the last 4 years or so!!!

Both briefs can be read here:
http://equalityontrial.com/

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#37 Jan 23, 2013
Truthteller wrote:
It is ludicrous to try to call the hate based movement to disenfranchise voters on marriage a civil rights movement. It is quite the opposite! You are a racist to claim that it is somehow the same thing to be born an African American or to choose to engage in the unspeakable God-forbidden acts that alone define and identify homosexuality. Homosexual 'marriage' is a complete fraud.
It has been overwhelmingly rejected by homosexuals as an actual practice in every country that allows it, and studies have shown that most such 'marriages' aren't even exclusive arrangements.
No homosexual relationship shares the reasons for government involvement in real marriage. No child is ever born as a direct result and no such relationship can provide a child with a father and mother. Homosexual 'marriage,' where legal, isn't even a basic building block of homosexual society, much less of society as a whole. There is no standardized format for homosexual 'marriages,' and no economically unequal genders are involved.
Why not forget about disenfranchising others in order for force your concocted, failed philosophy into law? Why not try a little live and let live?
Get back to me when someone tries forcing you into a marriage you don't want. Until then, you ARE experiencing "let live".

Since: Mar 07

Woodford, VA

#39 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
They have taken way the glories power of marriage through homosexuality, fool!
Okay, that's funny.

One could wonder just how that would work.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#41 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Evil homosexuals are in Britain then? So you went to see the queen?
Why would she let you?
What part of my saying "I have read" did you miss? Typical hater...lazy on comprehension, sloppily educated, quick to jump to conclusions.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#42 Jan 23, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not up on the legal terms......I do know that after reading both briefs that I found interesting that the proponents of Prop 8 truly have ignored the issue of the existing legal marriages of Same-Sex Couples and feel that if they don't have standing, then both the 9th's and Judge Walker's rulings should be vacated.
The rest of the briefs are pretty much the same stuff we've read about over the last 4 years or so!!!
Both briefs can be read here:
http://equalityontrial.com/
The proponents of Prop h8 have a valid argument. Let's hope that the SCOTUS does not concur.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#43 Jan 23, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
The proponents of Prop h8 have a valid argument. Let's hope that the SCOTUS does not concur.
And which valid argument would that be? Because to be truthful......they have NEVER had a valid argument before!!!

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#44 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
We kill people <
“As irrational prejudice plainly never constitutes a legitimate government interest, this court must hold that Section 3 of DOMA as applied to Plaintiffs violates the equal protection principles embodied in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”(Gill v.)

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#45 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
Homosexuality is evil. We kill people who want evil marriages. ITS VERY SIMPLE HAHAHAHAHHAKJDLKS:KMKLDEJR< :F>?KDL<
You don't have a clue what "evil" is, if you support KILLING people who have never wronged you. Marriage is a joining of people who love each other and want to support each other for the rest of their lives. You have something wrong in your head if you call THAT "evil".

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#46 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
They have taken way the glories power of marriage through homosexuality, fool!
Hey if you want to go online and basically compare your own mother to a breeding bitch at a puppy farm, I'm not going to stop you.

But if you try to do the same to my Mom your buddies will be forever talking at the Pub of the day some poofter whipped your ass.

BTW moron in the UK both Conservatives and Liberals idolize your Constitution. Just like Conservatives and Liberals here in the USA.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#47 Jan 23, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not up on the legal terms......I do know that after reading both briefs that I found interesting that the proponents of Prop 8 truly have ignored the issue of the existing legal marriages of Same-Sex Couples and feel that if they don't have standing, then both the 9th's and Judge Walker's rulings should be vacated.
The rest of the briefs are pretty much the same stuff we've read about over the last 4 years or so!!!
Both briefs can be read here:
http://equalityontrial.com/
Thanks for the link.

Haven't read them both yet, but a quick scan of the BLAG brief looks like the same old rejected arguments. They fail to show how denial of equal treatment encourages straight people to have children more responsibly, or how harming gay families is justified by anything more than a history of discrimination.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#48 Jan 23, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the link.
Haven't read them both yet, but a quick scan of the BLAG brief looks like the same old rejected arguments. They fail to show how denial of equal treatment encourages straight people to have children more responsibly, or how harming gay families is justified by anything more than a history of discrimination.
You are welcome for the link......the Prop 8 brief is relatively the same as it has been in the past, except that now they don't seem to want to acknowledge the 18,000 legally married Same-Sex Couples who don't have a DP and the marriages are still legal and valid today as they were just after the passage of Prop 8......I'm certain Olson and Boies will make sure that doesn't go unmentioned!!!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#49 Jan 23, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
And which valid argument would that be? Because to be truthful......they have NEVER had a valid argument before!!!
If the Proponents' Petition for Standing had been denied, there would have been no Hearing before Chief Circuit Judge Walker. The question then becomes whether or not the Petition should have moved forward.

It's funny, though. The proponents are asking the SCOTUS to vacate the very Ruling that they first fought for. lol

" ... straining at gnats and swallowing camels ... "

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#50 Jan 23, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
If the Proponents' Petition for Standing had been denied, there would have been no Hearing before Chief Circuit Judge Walker. The question then becomes whether or not the Petition should have moved forward.
It's funny, though. The proponents are asking the SCOTUS to vacate the very Ruling that they first fought for. lol
" ... straining at gnats and swallowing camels ... "
Not true......the proponents could intervene at the lower district level aka Judge Walker's courtroom......that doesn't mean they had Article 3 standing to appeal to the 9th. Here is a site that might help explain better:
http://americablog.com/2010/08/do-the-prop-8-...

There are specific requirements for a group to move forward and appeal to a higher court......I don't believe that the proponents ever truly had that right.....I believe the CSSC gave them that right to try and protect the initiative process!!!

It is also one of the reasons that the proponents needed to have Imperial County be involved!!!
Jack Hamilton

United States

#51 Jan 23, 2013
Gods word is very clear on this in Leviticus 18:22
and there are real consequences for going against
it.
Jack

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Biggest Gay Lies (May '14) 23 min Benny 2,720
ACLU sues to allow gay club in Indiana school 24 min tom 31
Church-based institutions ponder same-sex benefits 39 min Juan Martinez 9
Sneaky Pete's Gay Christmas Message 40 min Sneaky Pete 1
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 40 min Benny 68,584
Poll: Support for gay marriage drops in Mich. (May '14) 42 min Sneaky Pete 60
Christmas Eve NE Jade Party 49 min Benny 2
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr jesusHchrist 6,013
Next gay marriage fight: religious exemptions 1 hr NorCal Native 5,128
Anti-gay Tenn. billboard stirs religion debate 1 hr Mikey 2,997
US Moves Toward Dropping Lifetime Ban on Gay Bl... 7 hr NorCal Native 22
More from around the web