Opinion != fact. And we did want to win and we did win. We don’t have to convince everybody we’re right, we just have to convince the right people we are right and we did and we won.
Only left is the crying, screeching, rioting, threats, etc. Sadly the decision comes as the U.S. is falling apart at record speed. In 10 years who knows if there will be a US at all.
In the mean time, to quote Jim Morrison, “I don’t know what’s gonna happen man, but I am going to get my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames!” He was a poet after all.
1 Like
I believe he asked this with regard to a pregnant woman having the choice.
That’s exactly how the politicians want it.
Talking the distinction between “rights” and “laws” I like to approach this from a mathematical approach.
Though far from precise I approach Constitutional Rights as they are the “axioms.” Legislative Laws are the “theorems.” All legislative laws (theorems) are accepted if they comply with Constitutional rights (axioms).
Pat is an example of what is wrong with this country. There are serious issues that affect people’s lives and ill informed, uneducated and immature people like him treat it like a game. The thing is, when his side loses, and it happens, he turns into the very people he mocks. Weirdos like pat vacillate between victory and victim hood.
1 Like
The bottom line is this
The judicial branch interprets laws, they are not supposed to make law
The legislative branch makes law…just because they refuse to make law, does not mean the judicial branch is required to make law
you don’t want 9 judges making law for the entire country, it will not be a republic or a democracy if you want that
1 Like
Right now, it seems that the court doesn’t even want to interpret the law when they bring up reversing decisions on marriage rights.
Which law did they reverse on marriage? did not hear about that
Thomas has mentioned revisiting decisions the court has made on gay marriage. Of course he leaves out interracial marriage, which the court also ruled on, since he is in an interracial marriage. The decision to legalize gay marriage was based on the precedent set by Loving vs Virginia so revisiting gay marriage could jeopardize interracial marriage.
1 Like
Is there a law created by congress or did the supreme court make a law pertaining gay marriage?
if congress passed a law, then the supreme court should leave it alone unless it is unconstitutional
If it isn’t protected by the Constitution specifically, it falls to the states. The Federal government doesn’t get to control everything. That’s not how the system is set up.
4 Likes
You are correct, i could not figure how to word it and you did it perfectly
They ruled that it did.
But they used the same faulty reasoning they did in Roe. I say that while currently being in an interracial marriage.
They used the 14th amendment. The same one that Loving vs Virginia used. Let’s ask Thomas if the court should send interracial marriage back to the states.
I am certain he would say they should unless they can come up with a better reason why it is constitutionally protected.
That shows an extremely shallow and vapid understanding of the ruling based on all the other cases Roe is cited in. It takes away privacy rights.
Hard line Conservatives claim to be on the side of personal liberty and freedom. In Reality though, they are only for that if the other people’s idea of personal liberty falls directly in line with their own belief and moral system. This has become ever more apparent over the last decade or so.
So, how can you say it’s a win for conservatives when it takes away the exact thing they say they stand for?
1 Like
Interracial marriage has just about become a necessity to get married. There are a large percentage of children born from interracial marriages. What are their options for marriage partners?
Add to that all the confusion DNA testing to determine your heritage. Now it looks like there are more mixed racial people in the USA than any racial group.
The notion that the Supreme Court would take on this can of worms is laughable.
I am not understanding having a law that allows interracial marriage…if its between a man and a woman, who cares what their race is
He wouldn’t if he were going to marry his wife in his home state of Georgia prior to Loving vs Virginia.
This has nothing to do with its legal standing.
Ask the states where it was illegal prior to 1967. I’m sure many supporters are still alive.
Sounds like republicans and democrats in my opinion.
1 Like