U.S. Supreme Court legalizes nationwide gay marriage - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-26-2015, 05:07 PM   #61 (permalink)
Zum Henker Defätist!!
 
The Batlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 48,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
State's rights rebuttal:



Unelected judges rebuttal:
But that doesn't address the issue of whether or not the Court is stretching their interpretation of Constitutional law to an extent that they're in effect rewriting it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien
There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.
The Batlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 05:17 PM   #62 (permalink)
SOPHIE FOREVER
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 35,541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord View Post
But that doesn't address the issue of whether or not the Court is stretching their interpretation of Constitutional law to an extent that they're in effect rewriting it.
That wasn't in the points that we were discussing, but since you asked nicely:

Quote:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The LGBT community was being denied privileges that were granted to heterosexual couples, which sounds like something that the 14th amendment does not allow for. I think that's a valid justification for declaring same sex marriage bans unconstitutional.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 06:41 PM   #63 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
fiddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 242
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord View Post
But that doesn't address the issue of whether or not the Court is stretching their interpretation of Constitutional law to an extent that they're in effect rewriting it.
It doesn't matter. The Supreme Court's job is to decide if a law does or does not violate the rights of the citizens. In this case, they have decided that it does. I for one am incredibly happy.
__________________
Every being is intelligent. But if you measure a fish's intelligence on it's ability to climb a tree, it will live forever thinking it's stupid.
fiddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 06:54 PM   #64 (permalink)
Born to be mild
 
Trollheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: 404 Not Found
Posts: 26,992
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YorkeDaddy View Post
A historic day. It's about ****ing time.
Ireland led the way!
__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018
Trollheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 06:55 PM   #65 (permalink)
Fck Ths Thngs
 
DwnWthVwls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,261
Default

Yeh with extra sausage for breakfast..
__________________
I don't got a god complex, you got a simple god...

Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor View Post
I'd vote for Trump
DwnWthVwls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 07:34 PM   #66 (permalink)
Zum Henker Defätist!!
 
The Batlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 48,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
That wasn't in the points that we were discussing, but since you asked nicely:
I did actually. It was the entire basis of my argument.

Quote:
The LGBT community was being denied privileges that were granted to heterosexual couples, which sounds like something that the 14th amendment does not allow for. I think that's a valid justification for declaring same sex marriage bans unconstitutional.
I'm well aware that the 13th Amendment extended the jurisdiction of the Bill of Rights to the states. I'm not talking about states' rights. I'm talking about how the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution in general.

I'm also not talking about this ruling. As far as I'm concerned, gay marriage does fall under the Constitution. At the same time, I didn't even know this was a case until today, so I have no idea who the parties involved in the case are, what the case was about, or how the Court interpreted the Constitution to decide their ruling. For all I know, this could in fact be bad law, not because the Constitution shouldn't protect gay marriage, but simply because the specifics of the case might not have justified the Court's application of the law in this specific case. I simply have no idea, since, again, I have no idea what the case was.

I was using Brown v. Board of Education as my example (improperly I must admit, as I should have been referring to Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States), because the Court interpreted the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution to rule that businesses discriminating based on race was unconstitutional. The clause reads that "The Congress shall have power...":

Quote:
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
The bolded was the basis for their decision (along with the Civil Rights Act of 1964). Basically, the Court said that a business that catered to out of state customers was violating the Constitution by discriminating against blacks, and this has since been interpreted to encompass pretty much everything.

My point is that it's a big stretch to say that the Commerce Clause should extend to that. And if the Court can interpret the Constitution to say pretty much anything it wants to, then the Constitution's authority has been functionally superseded by the Supreme Court.

Again, I'm not worried about the Court staging a quiet coup to seize control of the government, since they generally are pretty conservative about wielding their authority, but every time the law of the land becomes watered down whenever it suits the Court's moral prerogative, then the law of unintended consequences threatens to undermine the greater good of the country later on in unforeseen ways.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien
There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.
The Batlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 11:07 PM   #67 (permalink)
.
 
grindy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: .
Posts: 7,201
Default

Just as I thought it was time to update this one they did.

A 30-Second Guide to How the Gay Marriage Ruling Affects You | Cracked.com
__________________
A smell of petroleum prevails throughout.
grindy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2015, 12:17 AM   #68 (permalink)
Fck Ths Thngs
 
DwnWthVwls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,261
Default

The last one is the best.

Cheers! \/
__________________
I don't got a god complex, you got a simple god...

Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor View Post
I'd vote for Trump
DwnWthVwls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2015, 01:40 AM   #69 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burning Down View Post
It was only Massachusetts in 2003, 2 years before it happened here. I'm talking about recognizing it on a federal level, which it was not until this morning.
umm. yea you guys were on the cutting edge of legalized sodomy technology, but pretty sure we got to the moon before any of you bitches, so sit the **** down canada

USA USA USA
John Wilkes Booth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2015, 02:12 AM   #70 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
DeadChannel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,259
Default

Hey, today America became a little bit less completely ****ed.
Congratulations.
DeadChannel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.