T
toppick08
Guest
You better read the document.........
California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ba
- Thread starter foodcritic
- Start date
You better read the document.........
FromTexas
This Space for Rent
And this is why "no" was the best answer for you. Explaining isn't helpful.
Okay, I'll read it again for the 4,000th time.
Why don't you find for me where it says the government has the power to regulate marriage?
T
toppick08
Guest
FromTexas
This Space for Rent
T
toppick08
Guest
Okay, I'll read it again for the 4,000th time.
Why don't you find for me where it says the government has the power to regulate marriage?
Taxes......
FromTexas
This Space for Rent
Okay, I'll read it again for the 4,000th time.
Why don't you find for me where it says the government has the power to regulate marriage?
You said not into creating a theocracy - he says you should read it again. Why even try at just the regulate marriage level when he thinks it dictates a theocracy?
T
toppick08
Guest
Larry Gude
Strung Out
If anyone...
...spends five minutes in a history book and a few minutes reflecting on the founders, what they did NOT want was an official government religion as in what most of them knew, first hand, in England. Some of them were devout Christians. Some not so much. Jefferson believed in a divine creator of some sort or other if for no other reason but as a practical explanation of mans being, but none of them believed in a requirement of any kind as regards religion; you had inalienable rights; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This applied to everyone (except slaves) regardless of faith or lack thereof. No one was required to believe on God (a god, any god) in order to have free speech, possession of a weapon, security in their person and papers and so forth.
Homosexuality wasn't invented in the 1960's. I'm quite sure there were plenty of homosexuals in Jefferson's time. I think he and others would clearly recognize a right to what we call gay marriage. They may wonder why, but, in context of the modern world, they'd likely say "Whatever."
To clarify, what they would NOT find, is a prohibition against gay marriage in the constitution. I'm also quite sure they'd think it was fine for Virginia to ban it and Massachusetts to allow it as practical states rights social issues.
I think they'd think the whole thing silly.
...spends five minutes in a history book and a few minutes reflecting on the founders, what they did NOT want was an official government religion as in what most of them knew, first hand, in England. Some of them were devout Christians. Some not so much. Jefferson believed in a divine creator of some sort or other if for no other reason but as a practical explanation of mans being, but none of them believed in a requirement of any kind as regards religion; you had inalienable rights; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This applied to everyone (except slaves) regardless of faith or lack thereof. No one was required to believe on God (a god, any god) in order to have free speech, possession of a weapon, security in their person and papers and so forth.
Homosexuality wasn't invented in the 1960's. I'm quite sure there were plenty of homosexuals in Jefferson's time. I think he and others would clearly recognize a right to what we call gay marriage. They may wonder why, but, in context of the modern world, they'd likely say "Whatever."
To clarify, what they would NOT find, is a prohibition against gay marriage in the constitution. I'm also quite sure they'd think it was fine for Virginia to ban it and Massachusetts to allow it as practical states rights social issues.
I think they'd think the whole thing silly.
T
toppick08
Guest
You better spend a little more time on MD. history.........
Now, what's interesting is that the Constitution specifies that anything not outlined in that document goes to the States. However, we have a precedent in the Civil War that tempers that. The CSA said, "You're not the boss of us! We do what we want! :snap:" And Abe Lincoln said, "Actually, I AM the boss of you, and what part of "United" States don't you understand?"
So do the people of California have a right to vote to ban gay marriage? Sure. But it's up to the state legislature, and then the Supremes, to ensure equal rights and representation for all under state/federal law.
So do the people of California have a right to vote to ban gay marriage? Sure. But it's up to the state legislature, and then the Supremes, to ensure equal rights and representation for all under state/federal law.
T
toppick08
Guest
There is nothing in the Contitution, that says a state has to be part of the Union.....maybe, an ill-fated choice, but a right, none-the-less........
Larry Gude
Strung Out
*lol*...
...I actually thought that when I read it. He listens to Winger. You can't talk to those people.
...I actually thought that when I read it. He listens to Winger. You can't talk to those people.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Why?
...so we can discuss Maryland's constitutional ban on same sex unions?
If you read my post, you'd see where I proffered that Jefferson would probably support states doing as they see fit, as Cali has done. He just would not support a federal, constitutional prohibition on gay marriage. No way.
...so we can discuss Maryland's constitutional ban on same sex unions?
If you read my post, you'd see where I proffered that Jefferson would probably support states doing as they see fit, as Cali has done. He just would not support a federal, constitutional prohibition on gay marriage. No way.
T
toppick08
Guest
...I actually thought that when I read it. He listens to Winger. You can't talk to those people.
.that was a long time ago........
The South seceded, and the North kicked their hostile foreign asses and annexed them. No different than Texas/Mexico or any other territory a nation has claimed in war. If the South wanted to remain independent, they should have fought harder.
T
toppick08
Guest
The South seceded, and the North kicked their hostile foreign asses and annexed them. No different than Texas/Mexico or any other territory a nation has claimed in war. If the South wanted to remain independent, they should have fought harder.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
If they...
...wanted to be independent all they had to do was go about it peacefully and not give Lincoln or Northerners any excuse to go to war. Fact is, they wanted war in the worst way.
They got it.
The South seceded, and the North kicked their hostile foreign asses and annexed them. No different than Texas/Mexico or any other territory a nation has claimed in war. If the South wanted to remain independent, they should have fought harder.
...wanted to be independent all they had to do was go about it peacefully and not give Lincoln or Northerners any excuse to go to war. Fact is, they wanted war in the worst way.
They got it.
It was my understanding that Lincoln wanted to preserve the Union more than anything, and that was his big motivation with the Civil War, not necessarily slavery. It makes no sense to me that he'd have let the southern states go independent. But you know more about this than I do, so please reconcile that for me.
T
