Current SCOTUS case on DOMA

[mav]

Well...  The SCOTUS is currently hearing oral arguments on DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act).  I have made opinion known on same sex marriage in numerous other threads.  I think the government (federal and state) should get out and stay out of the marriage business.  We should have civil unions for everyone, straight and gay.

 

My intent was not to create another thread on gay marriage.  We have had plenty of those, and nobody ever convinces each other that their viewpoint is correct.  The reason I posted the thread is because this country is going to $hit, that little fat bastard in NK is on the verge of starting another war, and McCain and Graham keep pushing us to go into Syria, and what is everyone so focused on? ****ing gay marriage.  Is this akin to playing the fiddle while Rome burns?

 

 

(edit) - took care of my pejoratives :)

Edited March 28, 2013 by mav

[Jonnin]

The supreme court is not responsible for any of the stuff you listed.  It has no influence on who we bomb, how we handle NK, or the rest of it.  Their job is to evaluate how much of the constitution we can rape today, and what should be left for tomorrow.   So I say no, its not the same.  If congress is playing around with stupid crap like gun control or quibbling over pork,  that is like nero.   So, we are in the nero situation, its just not the fault of the court?  

[mav]

The supreme court is not responsible for any of the stuff you listed.  It has no influence on who we bomb, how we handle NK, or the rest of it.  Their job is to evaluate how much of the constitution we can rape today, and what should be left for tomorrow.   So I say no, its not the same.  If congress is playing around with stupid crap like gun control or quibbling over pork,  that is like nero.   So, we are in the nero situation, its just not the fault of the court?  

 

I understand what the SCOTUS is responsible for. I should have clarified my argument because my rant has nothing to do with the SCOTUS. It is with the media and a lot of our citizen's attention being so focused on this issue. Yes, I understand this is important to some people, but in the grand scheme of things this is really a small problem. Yes, by all means cover what the SCOTUS is doing, but to ignore everything else and focus most of your attention or coverage on this sole issue is exactly like the Nero analogy. I was being rhetorical when I used it.

 

We had that twit Sebelius actually acknowledge today that Obamacare is raising everyone's premiums. Granted, there is not much we can do with Obama in office and media blocking for him, but in my mind, that acknowledgement is of far more importance than same sex marriage. The Senate just recently passed a ridiculous budget that will do absolutely nothing except put us further in debt. That is also of greater importance. I could go on and on with numerous examples.

 

So in essence, my thread is really nothing more than a b*tchfest, and I hope I clarified what I was griping about.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I understand what you are getting at, Mav. Our society is going down the crapper, along with all the governmental

intrusions causing problems, spending money, pitting American against American. It is all inter-related and all of it

is doing it's share of damage.

 

Call me tinfoil if you please, but the stuff like the DOMA challenge is purely political. It is just one more way to splinter

society from one institution that has a reason to exist, at least from a religious and moral standpoint, to another that

may or may not have any reason to exist in just about any form. The gay "movement" is one thing, and I don't doubt

there are good parents made from same sex couples, but there is more to it than just allowing same sex couples to

parent, and the marriage thing should be left within the church, whatever the churches desire to stay within scriptural

beliefs and doctrines. it is no business of the government when there are remedies within existing laws.

 

But those who wish to continue the argument for same sex marriages instead of addressing the other societal problems

first, have at it. We are on a pathway to Hell and this issue won't fix one thing that is currently wrong with our society,

except make a few more people feel good, or entitled to something. It sure as Hell isn't a right like they think. And I don't

have any good expectations about how they rule on this.

 

When I saw that about Sebelius, all it said to me is how much more can go wrong with our country before people get

their heads out of the sand. She lied from the very first thing she spoke about concerning Obamacare. That woman

is one more communist in the administration. I had my opinions about her a long time ago and haven't change my

opinion of her.

[RED333]

:wave: Hey got off it, if SCOTUS says it OK, then I can wed my goat. :yum:

 

Our DADBURN country is being torn apart by people that dont like the way we live,

The Land Of the FREE and Home of the BRAVE is not so much anymore.

[Dennis1209]

If the Federal Government would stick to the only powers granted it by the Constitution, and the rest being states and individual rights, problem(s) solved nationally.

 

If the Federal SCOTUS would stick to and hear only those issues under the Constitution and Bill of Rights granted them, more problem(s) and disputes solved nationally.

 

If the Federal Government would go back to the foundations of English Law which we modeled after, human God given rights, the foundational morals that separated U.S. resulting in the 1776 quest for freedom and independence, most other problems would be solved.

 

We are not a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic which we stand, one nation under the one living God, which we were founded. If God gives U.S. our rights, he will not ever take them back. If a king, politician, president, congress, etc. gives us our rights, they can be modified and / or taken back at anytime, as is occurring bit by bit from our foundation. Man is inherently hungry for power over other men. That's an indisputable historical fact no one can argue, period!

 

If our nation was founded and based on Biblical law and principals, English law and independence from a monarchy... Look at where we're currently at and heading toward.

 

Just common sense, where would the human population be as far as population, morals and disease if the world were mostly Sodomites? Next is the question of what's next, "beastiality"? There's a created plumbing difference for a good reason.

 

Just my biblical and historical views folks.

[RED333]

Very well said Dennis!!!

[Garufa]

I submit that if anyone ever wants to see conservatives in charge of this country again they'll let this one go.  Homos getting married effects no one.

 

The Repbulican party is teetering on the brink of irrelevance and the last I checked they where the represetatives of conservatives.  If they keep on fighting against people's "pursuit of happiness" then don't be surprised if the Dems take the White House again in 2016, and everything else.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Garufa

[Guest zort]

we all want our rights, i want my right to carry a gun, others might want the right to be with another dude. who cares, each his own. wish everyone would stop pushing there beliefs on others and worry about themselves.

[R_Bert]

Bang whatever you like. Just don't be offended by my response when you ask me if I agree with you.

[Guest zort]

i dont agree with it, but i keep my comments to myself. just like i dont need people telling me smoking kills when im smoking, or someone telling me that guns are dangerous.

[daddyo]

[URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/46/57913810151507926834281.jpg/][/URL]

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I submit that if anyone ever wants to see conservatives in charge of this country again they'll let this one go.  Homos getting married effects no one.

 

The Repbulican party is teetering on the brink of irrelevance and the last I checked they where the represetatives of conservatives.  If they keep on fighting against people's "pursuit of happiness" then don't be surprised if the Dems take the White House again in 2016, and everything else.

The Republican Party is already irrelevant because of more than just one issue like this. The problem with this issue is

it doesn't need to be an issue at all and there is a group of people making this an issue for reasons I fail to understand.

Civil unions are fine with me, but leave the word "marriage" out of it.

[piercedan]

Not to stir a different pot, but biblical law IS a monarchy.

[daddyo]

Not to stir a different pot, but biblical law IS a monarchy.

Do you mean a theocracy?

[piercedan]

No, monarchy.  King of kings, etc. A theocracy is still ruled by men under direct connection with God or gods, but the bible ultimately establishes a monarchy ruled buy God as the king.  Or Jesus, depending on how it is phrased or viewed by a particular denomination.

[hipower]

Very well said Dennis!!!

Yes. I'll second that.

[hipower]

we all want our rights, i want my right to carry a gun, others might want the right to be with another dude. who cares, each his own. wish everyone would stop pushing there beliefs on others and worry about themselves.

 

"We all want our rights"...thats true. The right to carry a gun...yes. reafirmed by the Constitution as given by God. The "Right" to be with another dude..semantics maybe, but it's a choice to be with another dude, not a right.

 

"...wish everyone would stop pushing there beliefs on others and worry about themselves." I agree that would be ideal, but as long as a small minority tries to make the majority conform to their wishes and beliefs by lawsuits, pubic forum, and calling that other side hate mongers, racists and biblethumpers, and going against the wishes of that majority; that's not a right. That's a choice. That's trying to push the belief of one onto another by brute force. That's a choice as well. Not a right to make me conform to your wishes.

 

And that's what we have now ongoing in this country in the form of defaming the beliefs of a larger group by a considerably smaller group. As in the atheist pushing to force the Christian belief out totally because it offends him. What about the offense to the Christian? The Christian's beliefs are his choice. Does he file suits against the athiest to stop his choice to not believe in a diety?

 

And I'll step on toes here I know, but here goes. Same can be said about the " dude with another dude" or woman with woman, the gay, lesbian and transgender. If you wanna indulge in that, go for it. But don't try to force it in my face by laws saying if I don't agree with you I'm guilty of a hate crime. If it's the choice you or anyone wants...it's that persons' choice to do so. But its within my choices to disagree with it. 

 

And zort, this is not at all directed at you or to you. You just made a point that allowed me to go in this direction.

Edited March 28, 2013 by hipower

[Oh Shoot]

... as long as a small minority tries to make the majority conform to their wishes and beliefs by lawsuits, pubic forum ...

 

...And that's what we have now ongoing in this country in the form of defaming the beliefs of a larger group by a considerably smaller group. ...

 

Do you really think we'd have what firearm freedoms we still have now if it were up to majority vote across the country?

 

I'm not even sure we'd be able to carry if that depended on just TN state referendum majority.

 

Hell, we might have still had slavery till the 1980's if it were up to majority vote of the citizenry.

 

- OS

Edited March 28, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[Links2k]

Pitting American against American
 
We are on a pathway to Hell and this issue won't fix one thing that is currently wrong with our society.

I strongly agree.

[Jonnin]

Just common sense, where would the human population be as far as population, morals and disease if the world were mostly Sodomites? Next is the question of what's next, "beastiality"? There's a created plumbing difference for a good reason.

 

Just my biblical and historical views folks.

 

You may not want to go there lol.   The world would probably be better off due to the decreased population.  90% of our problems stem from overpopulation and specifically the massive, multimillion person ghettos like NYC, LA, etc. 

[leroy]

Its a given that the morals, ethics, habits, etc. ect. ect... of "...those of lower estate..." are goin down the tube.  That is the nature of things.   Darwin wuz wrong about evolution.  We are devolving; not evolving; and this topic is a great proof of that fact.

 

In my view, the deal on same sex marriage is both phiosophical and fiscal.  The philosophical or metaphysical (....or nearly spiritual one...) is the yearning of the homo to be accepted as a full fledged, even valued member of society.  That, they believe, will make them "whole" and holy before their peers and whomever else they feel they need to be made whole before.  In short, they yearn to be seen as the new "norm" or even as someone to be looked up to by the "yooouths (....as Jessee Jackson would say....) of Amerika"; along with the attendant demand that they be protected by the force of the whole of the us gubmt ALA civil rights laws as a "protected class of citizen"...  The fact is that in some places in this country (...read that individual states ....); he (...she or it...) has this adulation today; and im ok with that.  I'm not ok with them demanding special citizen status and protections under the constitution.  Let 'em have the same protections that we do.  Murder and mayhem against anyone, gay or straight is still a crime in most places in this country. 

 

The other peice of this is the fiscal thing.  They want the same insurance coverage (...at the same rates, i would suppose...) as the "normal (...read that male - female, for real...) family would enjoy.  The same rules of inheritance, etc, etc, on and on.  Again, they have all this now in several states. 

 

The homojhiadist would have us all believe that they are somehow put upon and that they have been agreived somehow.  I just dont see how; but that's just me.  Evidently some of these homojhadists are people of considerable means (...read that that "they have money"...) because the usual cast of sons of satan is linin up to help them; especially the dammed polititians.

 

Havin said all this stuff; i fail to understand what the homo gripe is.  It looks to me like that they have the most of what they want now.  The other thing, which no human court can give them, that they really want is legitimacy.  They simply aint gonna get that one.  The legitimacy thing is a heart and spirit thing; that cant be legislated; it has to be accepted on and individual basis.

 

The Supreme Court is between a rock and a hard place on this one.  The constitution says nothin about marriage.  Marriage is a societal thing.  The DOMA thing is a duly passed law in the good ole USA.  The Prop 8 thing is a duly passed law in the state of kalefornia that the "fairy federal judge" later struck down; and a bunch of klowns on the ninth circuit court affirmed. 

 

It looks to me like the big question is whether the court had any juristiction in this case to begin with.   My guess is "no".  The original ruling shouldn't have been made at all.  My guess (...and it is a guess...) is that the supremes will say this one should have never been brought up in the federal court at all.  The state gives out marriage licenses; not the federal gubmt.  This one is a tempest in a tea pot.  It looks to me like the homojhadists may just have been "dissed" again.   Let us all wait 'en see. 

 

I say "...let him who is richeous be richeous still.  Let him who is filthy be filthy still...".  Ya cant legislate legitimacy, nor can you legislate opinions.

 

leroy

Edited March 28, 2013 by leroy

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That homojihadist(had to think about that one, Leroy :D) is, unfortunately, on both sides. This movement started

a long time ago and the gays were co-opted into the Democrat Party for nothing more than votes. The Democrats

don't care one bit about gays and probably most of them think worse of them than the stigma that has been cast

on the religious groups who oppose this. The problem won't go away until our country goes through this silly

motion it is currently living.

 

I don't care whether two of the same sex lives together, but that doesn't make them married, and until they realize

their fight is one to only make them into useful idiots and just be who they are without this media smear and live

their lives, it will not be tenable to the rest of society. They don't need more rights, just equal rights. That doesn't

mean they need more protection by the government, which is not supposed to be in the rights granting business,

anyway. Granting someone the privilege of a status reserved to a heterosexual couple by a church isn't the answer.

 

And legislating bias away is impossible, if not an unhealthy action for society. Bias is a way of society keeping itself

in check. The federal government has no business in this, like other things that were intentionally left out of the

Constitution.

 

When someone I don't know comes up to me and expects something, in this case for nothing, they need to do their

own PR first, then ask, not demand. These people are demanding something they have no "right" to. The disturbing

part to me is that they think they deserve something that is not theirs. I still think this is a concerted attempt to

destroy the institution of marriage.

[R_Bert]

Just thinking....in reality, the second law of thermodynamics is in full force on this, and many other issues we would not normally connect to it. 

 

We are biological construct, of energy and matter.  It is required that entropy always increases. 

 

Thus, as with all systems, we continue to fall apart and decay at an ever increasing rate.

 

Over time, although we may become more efficient, experienced and knowledgeable, and may stave off temporal effects (i.e. death), in the end, we must still devolve, not evolve.

 

No surprise.  We are just one of many societies and empires to crumble.

Edited March 28, 2013 by R_Bert

[piercedan]

Just thinking....in reality, the second law of thermodynamics is in full force on this, and many other issues we would not normally connect to it. 

 

We are biological construct, of energy and matter.  It is required that entropy always increases. 

 

Thus, as with all systems, we continue to fall apart and decay at an ever increasing rate.

 

Over time, although we may become more efficient, experienced and knowledgeable, and may stave off temporal effects (i.e. death), in the end, we must still devolve, not evolve.

 

No surprise.  We are just one of many societies and empires to crumble.

In certain aspects, you are correct.  However, I would say that it isn't completely inevitable.  What I mean is that we are not a closed system.  We allow outside ideas and influences, so therefore, there is a chance that some unknown input can correct our issues.  Not likely, but possible.