Gay marriage advocates eye Hawaii, Illinois, Orego...

Jul 9, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: WHTC

Activists will focus efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in four U.S. states this year and next, hoping to capitalize on political momentum following Supreme Court victories for gay rights, the Freedom to Marry advocacy group said on Tuesday.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of26
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jul 9, 2013
 
Same Sex Marriage bans are violating my rights under Article 4 (The F.F. & C.C.), Article 6 (The supremacy clause), Amendment 1 (Religious freedom), Amendment 9 (Non enumerated Rights guaranteed retained by the people) as well as the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

After all the words say "ALL CITIZENS" not "just the ones we like" or "only heterosexual citizens".

I just can't understand how people can have so much trouble comprehending what the word "ALL" means! Or that one plus one equals two and not 3 or more (the polygamy misconception of what EQUAL PROTECTION under the law means in relation to marriage equality).

BTW my X-Ray explains it all:

http://weheartit.com/entry/66640477

And for all the ones who want to argue "original intent" allow me to point out that the term "ALL" meant "All" ever since it came into our language over 3 centuries ago! If they "meant something other than 'all' they would have written it that way!

We MUST make sure when we file suits we include all these sections.

Maybe then it will be clear to these judges what the INTENT was!

Stop RE-DEFINING the word "ALL"

We must beat this into the consciousness of the nation! "ALL" means "ALL".

And before that polygamist jump in, I remind them that the laws say 2. Not 3 not 4 not 5. TWO people!
So don't piss on my leg claiming marriage equality under the law involves polygamy and try to convince me it's rain!

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jul 9, 2013
 
DNF wrote:
Same Sex Marriage bans are violating my rights under Article 4 (The F.F. & C.C.), Article 6 (The supremacy clause), Amendment 1 (Religious freedom), Amendment 9 (Non enumerated Rights guaranteed retained by the people) as well as the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
After all the words say "ALL CITIZENS" not "just the ones we like" or "only heterosexual citizens".
I just can't understand how people can have so much trouble comprehending what the word "ALL" means! Or that one plus one equals two and not 3 or more (the polygamy misconception of what EQUAL PROTECTION under the law means in relation to marriage equality).
BTW my X-Ray explains it all:
http://weheartit.com/entry/66640477
And for all the ones who want to argue "original intent" allow me to point out that the term "ALL" meant "All" ever since it came into our language over 3 centuries ago! If they "meant something other than 'all' they would have written it that way!
We MUST make sure when we file suits we include all these sections.
Maybe then it will be clear to these judges what the INTENT was!
Stop RE-DEFINING the word "ALL"
We must beat this into the consciousness of the nation! "ALL" means "ALL".
And before that polygamist jump in, I remind them that the laws say 2. Not 3 not 4 not 5. TWO people!
So don't piss on my leg claiming marriage equality under the law involves polygamy and try to convince me it's rain!
Let's hope the Court in these States see it the same way!!!

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jul 9, 2013
 
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's hope the Court in these States see it the same way!!!
Better yet let's make sure they do!

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jul 9, 2013
 
NEW POLL:

Is TOPIX allowing editors to censor Gay and stories on the Jacksonville FL Forum?

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jul 10, 2013
 
oops Should read: "Is TOPIX allowing editors to censor Gay and Lesbian stories on the Jacksonville FL Forum?"

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jul 10, 2013
 
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Better yet let's make sure they do!
Sounds like a plan!!!

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jul 10, 2013
 
DNF wrote:
oops Should read: "Is TOPIX allowing editors to censor Gay and Lesbian stories on the Jacksonville FL Forum?"
Wouldn't surprise me if they did.....ugh:(

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

We're likely to get a patchwork of rulings in different circuits- some in our favor, some not. That's actually a good thing because it ensures the SCOTUS will take the next case(s) and decide it on the merits instead of a technicality.

I love the irony of the anti-gays in Virginia being opposed to another ballot vote, because "they already voted" back in 2006. Hmmm, seems they aren't as confident of winning another popular vote. Could that have anything to do with the polling which shows 57% of Virginians now support marriage equality, with only 33% opposed?

So they whine about us going to the courts, but they also deny us the ability to put it to a vote.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
...I love the irony of the anti-gays in Virginia being opposed to another ballot vote, because "they already voted" back in 2006. Hmmm, seems they aren't as confident of winning another popular vote. Could that have anything to do with the polling which shows 57% of Virginians now support marriage equality, with only 33% opposed?
So they whine about us going to the courts, but they also deny us the ability to put it to a vote.
This is just one of the many clues that those opposing equality are S-T-U-P-I-D.

They were all jumping up and down and screaming, "LET THE PEOPLE VOTE!!!!" when "the people" were voting in their favor. But, OOPS! Now that those tables are turning a bit, all of a sudden they don't want the people to vote anymore??

Gee. Who coulda seen THAT coming??

It's just like all the pretend "christians" wanting to break down the wall between church and state. In a country with rapidly growing atheist and Muslim populations. Well, golly gee! What the hell do they think is going to happen when all the christianists become an even smaller minority than they are now, they can no longer frighten idiots into voting the way they want them to, AND the government is being run by whichever religious group is currently in the majority??? They're gonna wish that separation of church and state hadn't been knocked down, aren't they??

Again. STUPID with a capital S.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jul 10, 2013
 
DOMA section 2 precludes challenges to bans on the basis of FF&C, challenges to that protection have been incredibly unsuccessful. Interstate marriage recognition has never been held to FF&C by the federal courts, it's always been seen as an issue of comity.

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jul 10, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
We're likely to get a patchwork of rulings in different circuits- some in our favor, some not. That's actually a good thing because it ensures the SCOTUS will take the next case(s) and decide it on the merits instead of a technicality.
I love the irony of the anti-gays in Virginia being opposed to another ballot vote, because "they already voted" back in 2006. Hmmm, seems they aren't as confident of winning another popular vote. Could that have anything to do with the polling which shows 57% of Virginians now support marriage equality, with only 33% opposed?
So they whine about us going to the courts, but they also deny us the ability to put it to a vote.
Yup. And they say they want to protect the Constitutional Rights of unborn children but once they are born they don't care about denying these children those Constitutional rights.

It's not surprising at all that they are now spinning this as another bite at the apple.(Paging Roe v Wade! LMAO!)

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
We're likely to get a patchwork of rulings in different circuits- some in our favor, some not. That's actually a good thing because it ensures the SCOTUS will take the next case(s) and decide it on the merits instead of a technicality.
I love the irony of the anti-gays in Virginia being opposed to another ballot vote, because "they already voted" back in 2006. Hmmm, seems they aren't as confident of winning another popular vote. Could that have anything to do with the polling which shows 57% of Virginians now support marriage equality, with only 33% opposed?
So they whine about us going to the courts, but they also deny us the ability to put it to a vote.
Meanwhile the head of the Prop 8 losers is now shopping for an activist judge who he wants to have overturn the SCOTUS decision!

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jul 10, 2013
 
Rick in Kansas wrote:
DOMA section 2 precludes challenges to bans on the basis of FF&C, challenges to that protection have been incredibly unsuccessful. Interstate marriage recognition has never been held to FF&C by the federal courts, it's always been seen as an issue of comity.
IOW the courts don't like using the Supremacy Clause as well.

If they reject the "States Rights BS" these judges would never hold office again.

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
This is just one of the many clues that those opposing equality are S-T-U-P-I-D.
They were all jumping up and down and screaming, "LET THE PEOPLE VOTE!!!!" when "the people" were voting in their favor. But, OOPS! Now that those tables are turning a bit, all of a sudden they don't want the people to vote anymore??
Gee. Who coulda seen THAT coming??
It's just like all the pretend "christians" wanting to break down the wall between church and state. In a country with rapidly growing atheist and Muslim populations. Well, golly gee! What the hell do they think is going to happen when all the christianists become an even smaller minority than they are now, they can no longer frighten idiots into voting the way they want them to, AND the government is being run by whichever religious group is currently in the majority??? They're gonna wish that separation of church and state hadn't been knocked down, aren't they??
Again. STUPID with a capital S.
When I look at them I can see the wheel spinning but the hamster is dead.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
This is just one of the many clues that those opposing equality are S-T-U-P-I-D.
They were all jumping up and down and screaming, "LET THE PEOPLE VOTE!!!!" when "the people" were voting in their favor. But, OOPS! Now that those tables are turning a bit, all of a sudden they don't want the people to vote anymore??
Gee. Who coulda seen THAT coming??
It's just like all the pretend "christians" wanting to break down the wall between church and state. In a country with rapidly growing atheist and Muslim populations. Well, golly gee! What the hell do they think is going to happen when all the christianists become an even smaller minority than they are now, they can no longer frighten idiots into voting the way they want them to, AND the government is being run by whichever religious group is currently in the majority??? They're gonna wish that separation of church and state hadn't been knocked down, aren't they??
Again. STUPID with a capital S.
That's why they pushed so hard to pass constitutional bans early on when they still had the majority of voters behind them. They may be hypocritical bigots, but you have to give them credit for seeing what was coming down the road. They knew they had a small window to pass as many bans as they could before the changing demographics & public opinion caught up with them. They knew how difficult it would be to overturn those bans- even in the courts because there are more conservative judges in those states than liberal judges. And they knew they could prevent another vote from happening later as long as they controlled the state legislatures.

Stupid? NO.
Hypocritical bigots? YES!!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Rick in Kansas wrote:
DOMA section 2 precludes challenges to bans on the basis of FF&C, challenges to that protection have been incredibly unsuccessful. Interstate marriage recognition has never been held to FF&C by the federal courts, it's always been seen as an issue of comity.
No, DOMA doesn't preclude challenges on the basis of FF&C.

I agree such a challenge is unlikely to be successful given the history of marriage recognition, but DOMA in no way precludes such a challenge.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jul 10, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why they pushed so hard to pass constitutional bans early on when they still had the majority of voters behind them. They may be hypocritical bigots, but you have to give them credit for seeing what was coming down the road. They knew they had a small window to pass as many bans as they could before the changing demographics & public opinion caught up with them. They knew how difficult it would be to overturn those bans- even in the courts because there are more conservative judges in those states than liberal judges. And they knew they could prevent another vote from happening later as long as they controlled the state legislatures.
Stupid? NO.
Hypocritical bigots? YES!!
You're still giving them too much credit. What's stupid is doing something that you already know is going energize people to undo as soon as they can.

Sure, they got equality banned in some places, but ultimately they're going to be the losers because the more hate they spread the more people will learn that they're just about hate and selfishness.

The only ones that were REALLY smart in this whole deal were the political pundits and religious leaders that raked in BILLIONS from the hoards of idiots they panicked into giving them all their money to fight "the great evil" (that there's no point in fighting because it's not evil and it's not going away).

But your average hate-mongering fool that just wants to hurt the homos any way they can?? S-T-U-P-I-D to the bone. They were stupid to jump on that bandwagon in the first place and they're only going to end up exposing themselves as the hateful idiots they are.

Look at how most of us view the segregationists of the last generation... Sad fools fighting against a terrifying future they didn't understand and didn't want to learn about that was going to be coming no matter how much they fought against it.

I'd rather people remember me as being part of the brave activists that worked for equal rights than one of the hateful bigots fighting against it (and ultimately losing).

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why they pushed so hard to pass constitutional bans early on when they still had the majority of voters behind them. They may be hypocritical bigots, but you have to give them credit for seeing what was coming down the road. They knew they had a small window to pass as many bans as they could before the changing demographics & public opinion caught up with them. They knew how difficult it would be to overturn those bans- even in the courts because there are more conservative judges in those states than liberal judges. And they knew they could prevent another vote from happening later as long as they controlled the state legislatures.
Stupid? NO.
Hypocritical bigots? YES!!
I disagree (respectful;ly) on one small point. These are the same people who authored DOMA and didn't see that it would allow States to pass SSM. Their "States Rights" plan has back fired.

Too bad they aren't as smart as the rats.

Rats will leave a burning sinking ship as soon as they smell the smoke.

These folks aren't that smart in that respect.

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
No, DOMA doesn't preclude challenges on the basis of FF&C.
I agree such a challenge is unlikely to be successful given the history of marriage recognition, but DOMA in no way precludes such a challenge.
Thank you.

I admit I am not as savvy with legal stuff as you two are, but I do pay attention to you and learn a great deal. So thanks again for so much help over these years.

DNF

“A seat at the family table”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jul 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
You're still giving them too much credit. What's stupid is doing something that you already know is going energize people to undo as soon as they can.
Sure, they got equality banned in some places, but ultimately they're going to be the losers because the more hate they spread the more people will learn that they're just about hate and selfishness.
The only ones that were REALLY smart in this whole deal were the political pundits and religious leaders that raked in BILLIONS from the hoards of idiots they panicked into giving them all their money to fight "the great evil" (that there's no point in fighting because it's not evil and it's not going away).
But your average hate-mongering fool that just wants to hurt the homos any way they can?? S-T-U-P-I-D to the bone. They were stupid to jump on that bandwagon in the first place and they're only going to end up exposing themselves as the hateful idiots they are.
Look at how most of us view the segregationists of the last generation... Sad fools fighting against a terrifying future they didn't understand and didn't want to learn about that was going to be coming no matter how much they fought against it.
I'd rather people remember me as being part of the brave activists that worked for equal rights than one of the hateful bigots fighting against it (and ultimately losing).
Thank you as well. You just explained quite well my idea of these Archie Bunkers and the results they can't see coming.

Many people complain about responding to offensive posts.

But I will NOT try to silence them when they provide such great ammunition for our guns.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of26
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••