Well, That's That

[aikido7]

What happened?

The secular reality has changed and the world has been emerging into the context of a true global culture of human rights and liberty and justice for all.

 

[fool]

The secular reality has changed and the world has been emerging into the context of a true global culture of human rights and liberty and justice for all.

Oh, is that all?

 

[jeffblue101]

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf

ALITO

It will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy. In the course of its opinion, the majority compares traditional marriage laws to laws that denied equal treatment for African-Americans and
women. E.g., ante, at 11–13. The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent.

Perhaps recognizing how its reasoning may be used, the majority attempts, toward the end of its opinion, to reassure those who oppose same-sex marriage that their rights of conscience will be protected. Ante, at 26–27. We will
soon see whether this proves to be true. I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots
and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools

 

[jeffblue101]

ALITO

Today’s decision will also have a fundamental effect on this Court and its ability to uphold the rule of law. If a bare majority of Justices can invent a new right and impose that right on the rest of the country, the only real limit on what future majorities will be able to do is their own sense of what those with political power and cultural influence are willing to tolerate. Even enthusiastic supporters of same-sex marriage should worry about the scope of the power that today’s majority claims.

Today’s decision shows that decades of attempts to restrain this Court’s abuse of its authority have failed. A lesson that some will take from today’s decision is that preaching about the proper method of interpreting the Constitution or the virtues of judicial self-restraint and humility cannot compete with the temptation to achieve what is viewed as a noble end by any practicable means. I do not doubt that my colleagues in the majority sincerely see in the Constitution a vision of liberty that happens to coincide with their own. But this sincerity is cause for concern, not comfort. What it evidences is the deep and perhaps irremediable corruption of our legal culture’s conception of constitutional interpretation.

Most Americans—understandably—will cheer or lament today’s decision because of their views on the issue of same-sex marriage. But all Americans, whatever their thinking on that issue, should worry about what the majority’s claim of power portends.

 

[Rusha]

Jeff, outside of your wishing to see homosexuals deprived of happiness, how exactly does this affect you?

 

[Alate_One]

ALITO

Yeah maybe Alito missed the Supreme Court decisions of the past that decided African Americans were property. The supreme court has ALWAYS had too much power and a majority could make sweeping changes. Blame the founding fathers, not the court.

 

[jeffblue101]

Yeah maybe Alito missed the Supreme Court decisions of the past that decided African Americans were property. The supreme court has ALWAYS had too much power and a majority could make sweeping changes. Blame the founding fathers, not the court.

Today’s decision shows that decades of attempts to restrain this Court’s abuse of its authority have failed

so where exactly does Alito make the claim there was a period of time that the Court hasn't abused it power.

 

[jeffblue101]

Jeff, outside of your wishing to see homosexuals deprived of happiness, how exactly does this affect you?

apparently, you haven't read a single post I made on this issue on the effects of this ruling.

 

[Rusha]

apparently, you haven't read a single post I made on this issue on the effects of this ruling.

I have read EVERY post you made. None of your reasons trump allowing adults the right to marry based on love rather than gender ... or race ... or whatever arbitrary qualification you wish to use.

 

[Stripe]

It's not OK to be gay

Seriously?

You Christians need to harden up. The issue is homosexuality is not OK. Arguing about housing regulations is stupid. It's like that other thread where the right got sucked into a meaningless debate over a flag when the issue was nine people getting murdered.

Repeat after me: It's not OK to be gay.

Rep from Deets on my post. :thumb:

I knew he was one of the good guys. :banana:

 

[Stripe]

I have read EVERY post you made. None of your reasons trumps allowing adults the right to marry based on love rather than gender ... or race ... or whatever arbitrary qualification you wish to use.

Except words have meaning. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman in a monogamous, lifelong relationship designed to build a family. Everyone has the right to marriage no matter what regulations men make.

 

[MrDeets]

Rep from Deets on my post. :thumb:

I knew he was one of the good guys. :banana:

You stinkin' :turkey:

I laughed pretty hard at that post. :rotfl:

 

[jeffblue101]

I have read EVERY post you made. None of your reasons trumps allowing adults the right to marry based on love rather than gender ... or race ... or whatever arbitrary qualification you wish to use.

So you have no qualms with christian universities going out of business if they continue to oppose gay marriage on their campus. According to your own reasoning, if you held that to be acceptable, Then how would you would be any different from someone who wishes to deprive people of their happiness. All that is been done with this ruling is attempt to create a new standard of morality that punishes Christians instead of the immoral

 

[Stripe]

:banana:

 

[MrDeets]

:banana:

If I only had a mod's powers and the knowledge to use them.... lol

 

[aikido7]

Oh, is that all?

How much does a single snowflake weigh?

Nothing next to nothing.

But it only takes one to drift down to a snow-laden branch of a fir tree and suddenly send the entire load to fall shimmering to the forest floor.

That's how change comes.

 

[Rusha]

So you have no qualms with christian universities going out of businessl

PRIVATE universities. Easy enough ... morality clause.

 

[Jose Fly]

http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/otherprotections.cfm

That's a regulation that applies only to the federal government. It's not a federal law.

 

[Rusha]

All that is been done with this ruling is attempt to create a new standard of morality that punishes Christians instead of the immoral

So ... the reason for marriage is now to punish those who disagree with you?

Should everyone who is immoral be denied the right to marry? Who gets to determine who is immoral?

 

[Lexington'96]

The Native Americans will continue resisting, well, at least some tribes will. What about the territories?