My confidence in the ability of this Court to actually know what's constitutional and what isn't is about as strong as my confidence in Obama to do the same.
- Status
My confidence in the ability of this Court to actually know what's constitutional and what isn't is about as strong as my confidence in Obama to do the same.
It harms me. I entered into marriage. Now it is nothing of the sort.
I know ... If anyone asks me if I'm married, I'll say, "No. I'm in Holy Matrimony." That'll work until that gets usurped as well.
Woody
I know ... If anyone asks me if I'm married, I'll say, "No. I'm in Holy Matrimony." That'll work until that gets usurped as well.
Woody
Once again, in America, we live in a Republic, not a Democracy. In a Democracy, the majority rules (also called "mob rule"). In a Republic, minorities are protected from the ILL will of the majority by the rule of law. BTW, the SCOTUS vote was 5-4. A couple of your "7 people" must have voted twice and it still didn't affect the outcome. To the OP's question: nope. Not at all.
Oh, and this "equal protection under the law" thingy? It has never been only gays and lesbians who are - eh - were forbidden to engage in a same sex marriage. Strait people were forbidden as well.
Woody
Woody
I would say that the almost 1 million divorces granted annually in the U.S. has made more of a mockery out of marriage than the gays ever will.
Go check the definition of republic, then get back to me.
Every time this went to a vote, it was shot down. It took a small panel of individuals to make it happen. Thats not a republic, its an oligarchy.
It's nice to see our country evolving. I just don't see how love between two consenting adults can be a bad thing. I'm happy for them.
Definitely changes the life of a Divorce attorney.
Cha-Ching!
Cha-Ching!
There are churches in all states, including sweet home Oklahoma, that join same-sex couples in holy matrimony. Guess you lost that too
Now that gays are able to get married, that stat will change.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
