Gay Rights Fight Judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

Jan 14, 2014 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Fox News

U.S. District Judge Terrence Kern handed down the ruling in a lawsuit filed by two same-sex couples.

Comments (Page 6)

Showing posts 101 - 108 of108
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
chief22

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#119
Jan 16, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Here's a dose of some of that ORIGINAL INTENT folks like to toss around.

ARTICLE 4 [Legal Status of the Constitution]
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

"It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each."
- Chief Justice John Marshall; Marbury v Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
__________
"The courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law. It, therefore, belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents."
- Alexander Hamilton; Federalist No. 78

As for immorality, you just described the anti-gays. Did you know that it's legal to jail a minster in Indiana for presiding over a religious SSM? You call jailing clergy moral?
You do know that the original intent the Constitution applied to the Federal Government and here holding federal office.
Jeeesus Sheeeria

Philadelphia, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#120
Jan 16, 2014
 
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
With the exception, perhaps, of the North Marianas a "commonwealth" has no Federal legal existence. Even they are legally a U.S. Territory, whatever else they may choose to call themselves domestically.
More nonsense from the willfully uninformed.

There are four Commonwealths in the continental United States.

It is a fact, if a semantic fact.

Just as including or not including D.C. in a count of "states" with marriage equality is a harmless semantic point. One to be gently mocked...which will then be totally misunderstood by the gay fussbudget who's not too clear on much of anything.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121
Jan 16, 2014
 
chief22 wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that the original intent the Constitution applied to the Federal Government and here holding federal office.
What is the first mandate mentioned in its Preamble ?
hi hi

Lancaster, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#122
Jan 16, 2014
 

Judged:

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
Ah, yet another forum which has devolved into childish name calling & meaningless threats.
I think everyone stopped waiting to hear the *reason* that someone gay should EVER have to suffer any of that in the slightest. Even the so-called "biblical reason" is senseless: So they can procreate. OH WAIT, but that doesn't *explain* anything, it doesn't stand reasonably, nor does it make sense: Those who choose not to procreate are not vehemently and viciously and endlessly attacked, OH WAIT, LIKE PRIESTS WHO ARE CELIBATE UNDER THE DIRECTION,*WHOOPS*!, OF THE CHURCH!

It's mind-blowing. The church can violate God's directive, but a gay person's *inability to choose their orientation* cannot. And the antigay wonder why they are attacked back. It's incredible.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#123
Jan 16, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

Christsharia Law wrote:
Fk you fagg@t, you being the one with either a peter up your a:ss or in your mouth, are the one who needs help. Mental illness is a terrible thing to bare.
You have an awful lot of homoerotic fantasies for a straight boy.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#124
Jan 16, 2014
 
Jeeesus Sheeeria wrote:
<quoted text>
More nonsense from the willfully uninformed.
There are four Commonwealths in the continental United States.
It is a fact, if a semantic fact.
Just as including or not including D.C. in a count of "states" with marriage equality is a harmless semantic point. One to be gently mocked...which will then be totally misunderstood by the gay fussbudget who's not too clear on much of anything.
"Semantics" ?

Even a comma matters in the Law.
Launch Officer

Philadelphia, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#125
Jan 16, 2014
 
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
"Semantics" ?
Even a comma matters in the Law.
Yes, semantic.

You cannot describe any material difference between PA's status as a commonwealth versus NY's status as a state.

It is a semantic difference, and one that's vaguely fun to play with. Get a grip.

Now, with the originating question of D.C. harmlessly being called a state, we can all recognize that there are actual differences for D.C. in being a district. But that doesn't mean it's a big deal if someone just includes D.C. in a count of how many "states" have marriage equality.

DNF

“Liberty AND Justice”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126
Jan 17, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

chief22 wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that the original intent the Constitution applied to the Federal Government and here holding federal office.
??????

lmao

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

ARTICLE 4 [Legal Status of the Constitution]

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 101 - 108 of108
|
next 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.

23 Users are viewing the Transgender Forum right now

Search the Transgender Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
meet here gays.(. jeddah) (Feb '10) 19 min jobi 12,009
Survey: Over 5K Same-Sex Couples Have Married i... 19 min Catholic League of Duncey 3
Trans Lobby Day to Bring Awareness to Capitol Hill 39 min Catholic League of Duncey 4
Top in dammam looking for filipino bottom 1 hr COCKY 15
Rift over religious exemption in anti-bias order 2 hr Catholic League of Duncey 3
Key high-risk groups threaten progress in globa... 3 hr TerryE 1
Pelosi backs gay-rights bill despite concerns 4 hr Fa-Foxy 5
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••