Gay Married Man Gets Green Card

Gay Married Man Gets Green Card

There are 734 comments on the EDGE story from Jul 3, 2013, titled Gay Married Man Gets Green Card. In it, EDGE reports that:

Late Friday, just two days after the US Supreme Court released their decision gutting the Defense of Marriage Act, a permanent visa, aka green card, was issued to Traian Popov, a Bulgarian man married to Florida-based club DJ Julian Marsh.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#662 Jul 30, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
We shall Rick because I feel confident this case will take many turns but you are only seeing the idea that the state has a just law in place that has not ever been defined by the federal government. State anti-discrimination protections are irrelevant on the federal level and you will need to see that first hand as these cases make there way through the court system. It is obvious you couldn't care less about the business owner however this case can clearly answer does the guaranteed right to public access mean the business owner's private right to exclude is violated?
Where do you think anti-discrimination protections laws originated from? Civil Rights clearly define discrimination as set forth by the federal government.
Tell that to the gay couples who tried to marry in Hawaii. The Hawaii Constitution include Amendment 14 almost word for word.

When it became clear after the SCoHA ruled that they has a right to marry, the anti gays CHANGED the State Constitution.

Good lord, you are making such a fool of yourself with Rick and the rest of us. Rick knows his stuff. You obviously are using Archie Bunker thinking to make your case.

Allow me to put this another way.

SCOTUS under the Windsor decision clearly showed that gays and lesbiansd are a protected class under the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. So PLEASE LEASE PLEASE explain to us why Federal law isn't being observed on over 30 States when it comes to SSM!

As I said to someone else, you haven't figured out for yourself if you are a Federalist or a State's Rights advocate.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#663 Jul 30, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't matter if they are or are not because only the federal courts can validate a protected class as defined by federal law.
Unless it's a State's Rights issue.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#664 Jul 30, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I agree many have been lost however none have tried the case based on the federal laws that exist NorCal. Appeals are won because the case needs further investigation and you fail to see that. Much like the DOMA and Prop 8. I personally am only interested in this particular case for a few reasons and that is to see how the courts define several things that have occurred with the florist.
SCOTUS rulings on State anti discrimination laws

https://www.google.com/search...

Someone once said it's better to remain silent and allow the world to think you are a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubts.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#665 Jul 30, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
This case will not be in the state system long because I foresee the federal system steeping in to answer the questions I have put on this very thread. No, I am not in any way barking up the wrong tree NorCal. If the case keeps winning appeals it is because the case needs further evaluation.
Geez you sound like the people who swore the Rapture would happen on May 21, 2011!

And the ones who were certain that SCOTUS would uphold PropH8!

Library of Date Setters of The End of the World!!!
http://www.bible.ca/pre-date-setters.htm

Better lay in a good supply of Ben and Jerry's dear. You're gonna need it!

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#666 Jul 30, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
What is the federal law that protects gays that specifically states "sexual orientation"? You other case has specific federal laws that were already enforced under the DEA.
Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#667 Jul 30, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Are there federal laws on the books that are against declaring gays a protected class?
Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act and the Winsor decision seems to indicate there aren't.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#668 Jul 30, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
I try to learn something new everyday.
Yet you're making an exception here.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#669 Jul 30, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
Sometimes I respond to none registered posters and sometimes I do not.
And sometimes you are so stuck on your ego you appear to be a twit.

What's your point?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#670 Jul 30, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
The bigger picture is not tolerating discrimination. You have been invited to offer a specific argument as to how just rights would be violated by providing her services for the wedding. That you have elected not to do so is telling.
One could infer that you cannot.
YUP

YUP and BAZINGA!

Good lord this person has been given links to discrimination cases under State laws that SCOTUS has upheld.

No wonder so many sent me e-mails warning me what a loon she is.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#671 Jul 30, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
You can infer anything you like because it is a one subject matter to you when in reality it deals with a much bigger question that I have posted numerous time. I have been an support of the LGBT since its inception and will continue to support what it stands for however this case deals with a small business and we as a country need to understand where the business owners rights end and the patriot of the business begins. The courts have not every decided a case such as the florist regardless of what you may think.
You say that because you refuse to read the decisions me and many others have provided you.

For crying out loud google "SCOTUS RULES ON STATE DISCRIMINATION LAWS"

and educate yourself.

You are one tedious clueless troll.

And before you get with Brian G and start claiming you are being bullied, understand that by pointing out your mistakes we are trying to help not bully.

OMG I just sounded like an anti gay christian!

MEA CULPA!

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#672 Jul 30, 2013
SCOTUS RULES ON STATE DISCRIMINATION LAWS

https://www.google.com/search...

Heck I think Rick could probably quote from memory most of these rulings! And so could many others!

I'm very touched you are so committed to gays and lesbians and our struggle for equality. I just wish you'd stop coming across as an uninformed gasbag!

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#673 Jul 31, 2013
Do civil unions really do what the anti gays said they would do?

Well well well. Look like the claims by the bigots that civil unions will do the same thing as marriage is unraveling in KY.

Exclusive: Will a lesbian couple be forced to testify against each other?

http://www.whas11.com/news/crimetracker/Exclu...

I hope we get this to be a big buzz on the internet. It will be interesting to hear the usual suspects respond,(Hannity, Limbaugh, Nom, AFA, Robertson, O'Reilly, etc.).

I Love it! PLEASE promote this story everywhere: Facebook; Twitter; etc.

Oh and all you anti gays who backed civil unions.....

“The Topix Legend of "GS8"!”

Since: Sep 10

Yunited States, North America

#674 Jul 31, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Yet you're making an exception here.
No, this case are about small business owners and where does the owners rights end and the patriots of the business begin. It is about the First Amendment and Free Exercise Clause.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#675 Jul 31, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
No, this case are about small business owners and where does the owners rights end and the patriots of the business begin. It is about the First Amendment and Free Exercise Clause.
The rights end at the border of the USA. Anymore stupid questions?

“The Topix Legend of "GS8"!”

Since: Sep 10

Yunited States, North America

#676 Jul 31, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
The rights end at the border of the USA. Anymore stupid questions?
It is in no way a stupid question Kitten. It is one that needs to be clearly answered by the courts. I have posted with you numerous times on gay issues and see this case very differently than I have seen others.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#677 Jul 31, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
It is in no way a stupid question Kitten. It is one that needs to be clearly answered by the courts. I have posted with you numerous times on gay issues and see this case very differently than I have seen others.
I simply answered your stupid question, I don't know what else you are babbling about at this point as I got bored with you a long time ago. The courts of the US have answered it very clearly, by enforcing the powers of the FDA and DEA, as well as other various commissions and laws that dictate specific business practices. In short, US law supersedes business practices every time, thus, their right to "do what they want" ends at the US border.

“The Topix Legend of "GS8"!”

Since: Sep 10

Yunited States, North America

#678 Jul 31, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I simply answered your stupid question, I don't know what else you are babbling about at this point as I got bored with you a long time ago. The courts of the US have answered it very clearly, by enforcing the powers of the FDA and DEA, as well as other various commissions and laws that dictate specific business practices. In short, US law supersedes business practices every time, thus, their right to "do what they want" ends at the US border.
Funny I posted the same thing earlier was attacked endless however I agree but no case such as the Florist has been heard.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#679 Jul 31, 2013
lides wrote:
[]Brian 35 states have some restriction against same sex marriage.
Some limitations, but no bans. Polygamy is banned by federal law, in every state but in every state you might have a religious same sex marriage ceremony, travel to and from a state that licenses same sex marriage or ask friends and relatives to treat you and your partner as if married without fear of legal repercussion.

.
lides wrote:
Thus far you have lacked the grey matter to offer any justification for such restrictions that would render them constitutional.
30 of those states define marriage as one man and one woman in their Constitutions. Same sex marriage is therefor unconstitutional.

.
lides wrote:
Of course, none of those secure equal protection under the law to marry. Ergo, homosexuals do not have equal protection under the law.
In every state, homosexuals may marry under the same laws as everyone else. They have equal protection, but that's not what lides' advocates; he wants special rights to rewrite marriage law for everyone.

.
lides wrote:
And you point is what, exactly? Oh, and please point out the federal law in question. You so seldom provide proof of your various claims.
There is no gender equality right in the US Constitution; the ERA failed.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#680 Jul 31, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Some limitations, but no bans. Polygamy is banned by federal law, in every state but in every state you might have a religious same sex marriage ceremony, travel to and from a state that licenses same sex marriage or ask friends and relatives to treat you and your partner as if married without fear of legal repercussion.
Nicely done.
.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>30 of those states define marriage as one man and one woman in their Constitutions. Same sex marriage is therefor unconstitutional.
Not under Federal law as per the Windsor decision. But yes on the State level. You're actually making sense for a change.
.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>In every state, homosexuals may marry under the same laws as everyone else. They have equal protection, but that's not what lides' advocates; he wants special rights to rewrite marriage law for everyone.
That is not true. You even just contradicted your first two claims. And you were doing so well too. 30 States legally ban SSM in their Constitutions as you just pointed out. It's tough keeping all your lies in order isn''t it?
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>There is no gender equality right in the US Constitution; the ERA failed.
You are confusing two issues. When the Constitution and courts interpret the phrase "all citizens" it is done on a gender neutral basis. Which is why the ERA failed and was silly to begin with. It was a stupid law just as much as DOMA was.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#681 Jul 31, 2013
GodSmacked wrote:
<quoted text>
It is in no way a stupid question Kitten. It is one that needs to be clearly answered by the courts. I have posted with you numerous times on gay issues and see this case very differently than I have seen others.
Yes because it is a poorly thought out premise. And we have supplied you with links of SCOTUS cases that show you don't know what you are talking about.

Here is the list I provided you almost two days ago.

https://www.google.com/search...

Don't complain about being attacked when you refuse to look at the evidence in front of your nose!

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.

Immigration Reform Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Trump wants military to secure border with Mexico 51 min RIP 381
News Trump Keeps Up Heat on Illegal Aliens 59 min RIP 65
News Gov. Jerry Brown says agreement reached on Cali... 2 hr spud 9
News Trump's Wall May Not Be Built, But The Illegal ... 3 hr Critical Eye 321
News Liberals say immigration enforcement is racist,... 3 hr WAKE UP CALL 279
Has Donald Trump Already Failed Us? (Nov '16) 4 hr Blonde and Sexy 19,000
News California: The Crazy State 7 hr DeadLeftistFunDitch 267