Obama urges Supreme Court to overturn...

Obama urges Supreme Court to overturn California same-sex marriage ban

There are 1525 comments on the The Washington Post story from Feb 28, 2013, titled Obama urges Supreme Court to overturn California same-sex marriage ban. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

The Obama administration told the Supreme Court on Thursday that California's ban on same-sex marriage violates the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection, a position that could also cast doubt on prohibitions in other states.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#1654 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Not only is it indisputable...it's totally reasonable...
Reasonable to someone with no imagination nor intellect. I bet you had to be spoon-fed every single tid-bit of information in school.

Consider this:

1) The government and groups of people seek or have sought to deny us rights, privileges, and protections available to other citizens.

2) The hate that some people show for us based on our inclusion in a particular group of people is the same. It is a hatred, a bias, a prejudice that is based on a single trait.

3) The black civil rights movement and the gay rights movement both seek to eradicate discrimination that is based on hate, bias, and intolerance.
Ramona

Converse, TX

#1655 Apr 26, 2013
Agrees with Getthat

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#1656 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
What does that have to do with anything??? It's still a push for polygamy .
It isn't in anyway or fashion a "push" for polygamy.

I find it hard that you come here and lie every time you open your mouth but don't punch yourself in the face every time you stand in front of a mirror.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1657 Apr 26, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
It isn't in anyway or fashion a "push" for polygamy.
I find it hard that you come here and lie every time you open your mouth but don't punch yourself in the face every time you stand in front of a mirror.
Oh yes...ssm has given polygamists a HUGE legal push...where it will go, no one can say for sure...but let there be 'no' doubt...ssm boosted polygamy to the forefront...

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1658 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
Oh yes...ssm has given polygamists a HUGE legal push...where it will go, no one can say for sure...but let there be 'no' doubt...ssm boosted polygamy to the forefront...
Child "A" has 2 apples, Child "B" has 3 apples.

Who has more?

Polygamists do not seek equal protection of the law.

Learn to count.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1659 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yes...ssm has given polygamists a HUGE legal push...where it will go, no one can say for sure...but let there be 'no' doubt...

------ssm boosted polygamy to the forefront-----...
...as we knew it would...

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1660 Apr 26, 2013
Isn't that cute? Fool found a friend. Or an alternate log in. Now if only they could muster a rational basis for their position against equality of the law for same sex couples to marry.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1662 Apr 26, 2013
There are many who don't want to see marriage trashed by special interest groups...

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1663 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
There are many who don't want to see marriage trashed by special interest groups...
And then there are the intelligent who understand the US Constitution, and it's guarantee of equal protection.

Feel free to detail any damage caused to a traditional marriage, whether existing or yet to be performed by allowing equality fro same sex couples to marry. Be specific.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1664 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
There are many who don't want to see marriage trashed by special interest groups...
Well, we live in a democracy and I vote FOR trashing marriage by special interest groups !(Mark my vote a "YES" !):)

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1665 Apr 26, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, we live in a democracy and I vote FOR trashing marriage by special interest groups !(Mark my vote a "YES" !):)
Of course you do...

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1666 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course you do...
Your position on this matter directly contradicts the First Amendment's GUARANTEE of Freedom Of Religion, as many religious denominations, individual churches, individual religious leaders, and other religious groups allow the marriage of LGBT people to be married in their houses of worship.

I take it therefore that you are ADAMANTLY OPPOSED to Freedom of Religion. Correct ?

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1667 Apr 26, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Your position on this matter directly contradicts the First Amendment's GUARANTEE of Freedom Of Religion, as many religious denominations, individual churches, individual religious leaders, and other religious groups allow the marriage of LGBT people to be married in their houses of worship.
I take it therefore that you are ADAMANTLY OPPOSED to Freedom of Religion. Correct ?
I disagree...

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1668 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree...
How does your position NOT violate the Freedom Of Religion clause in the First Amendment ?

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1669 Apr 26, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
How does your position NOT violate the Freedom Of Religion clause in the First Amendment ?
I'm not asking the federal government to interfere on their religion...just because a religion does something, doesn't mean the federal government has the responsibility to recognize it...otherwise, polygamy would be legal...

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1670 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not asking the federal government to interfere on their religion...just because a religion does something, doesn't mean the federal government has the responsibility to recognize it...otherwise, polygamy would be legal...
Still can't count to three, I see.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1671 Apr 26, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not asking the federal government to interfere on their religion...just because a religion does something, doesn't mean the federal government has the responsibility to recognize it...otherwise, polygamy would be legal...
My contention is:

If a heterosexual couple is married in a Baptist church, and the state they are married in legally recognizes that marriage, and then a gay or lesbian couple marry in a Lutheran church, and the state they are married in legally recognizes that marriage, THEN.... IF the federal government does NOT legally recognize the marriage of that gay or lesbian couple, the federal government is violating the religious freedom clause of the First Amendment, BECAUSE, they are picking and choosing among religions, which marriages to legally recognize, and which marriages NOT to legally recognize, based SOLELY on religious beliefs.

Don't you agree ?

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1672 Apr 26, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
And then there are the intelligent who understand the US Constitution, and it's guarantee of equal protection.
Feel free to detail any damage caused to a traditional marriage, whether existing or yet to be performed by allowing equality fro same sex couples to marry. Be specific.
I agree. The anti-Equality people, have no rational, logical, constitutional, nor legal arguments to defend their position.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1673 Apr 26, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
I agree. The anti-Equality people, have no rational, logical, constitutional, nor legal arguments to defend their position.
Fool is a special case, they actually seem to be proud of their bigotry and ignorance. Most people would try to hide such traits, but they shout them from the rooftop.
One need only watch how often they are completely off topic to see they have no valid on topic argument.
Then there is their continual return to arguments that same sex marriage will lead to polygamy, which further underscores not only their lack of intelligence, but their inability to count to three, or to understand that three or more is greater than two.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1674 Apr 26, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Fool is a special case, they actually seem to be proud of their bigotry and ignorance. Most people would try to hide such traits, but they shout them from the rooftop.
One need only watch how often they are completely off topic to see they have no valid on topic argument.
Then there is their continual return to arguments that same sex marriage will lead to polygamy, which further underscores not only their lack of intelligence, but their inability to count to three, or to understand that three or more is greater than two.
MANY people are PROUD of their stupidity and ignorance and flaunt it. Look at members of the KKK. or the Democratic Party. FOOLS all !

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.

California Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 27 min Dr Guru 234,613
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr OzRitz 62,982
roofiess Xan bar Blues OC H Addyis weed m... 20 hr dope 1
News California flood sweeps cabins, cars down coast... Sun Le Jimbo 4
Planned Parenthood Sat T J Rodney 1
News Closing the great divide between Trump and envi... Sat CAS 2
Best Connect FOR Opiods and other Pain relief Meds Fri lplkjd 1
More from around the web