Ninth Circuit rules Prop 8 unconstitutional. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 03:11:37 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Ninth Circuit rules Prop 8 unconstitutional. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Ninth Circuit rules Prop 8 unconstitutional.  (Read 6611 times)
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,764
United States


« on: February 07, 2012, 11:00:41 PM »

The will of the people of California is that gay marriage be banned. The Federal Government has no right to legislate from the bench. Article One Section Eight of the Constituition says nothing regarding social issues thus the Tenth Amendment is invoked thus the Ninth Circuit was in the wrong regarding this decision. They said it (the ban) violates the 14th Amendment. If the left wants to play that game, we on the right can use that to ban ALL abortions.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,764
United States


« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2012, 10:48:47 PM »

You have to determine that a fetus is a legal person first if you want to use the Fourteenth that way.

Nobody of note has ever denied that gays and lesbians are legal persons.

Give JCL time.

Nice try. What do you get when a male human and a female human made in the image of God have relations? A baby human is what you get. Natural Law dictates that said child in the womb should be protected. Natural Law determined that the baby in the womb is a legal person.

Gays and lesbians are legal people. It's their personal choices of a most intimate manner that are contrary to that Natural Law that God set in place. If I denied gays and lesbians legal personhood it would be as bad as those who deny childern in the womb their rights as legal people.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,764
United States


« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2012, 11:46:36 PM »

Blackstone would beg to differ.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,764
United States


« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2012, 12:31:33 AM »

Sir William Blackstone, the British jurist who died two hundred and thirty-two years ago? Somehow I doubt he had strong opinions on the the Reconstruction Amendments or modern LGBT rights movements.

But George Washington and most if not ALL of the  founders actively opposed gays in military service. Who influance the Founders on law? Blackstone. Who did Blackstone get his influance regarding law and governance? The Bible.

Natural Law=Law of Nature=Law of Nature's God. Who is Nature's God? The Judeo-Christian God. The Reconstruction Amendments were a recomfirmation of these rights. LGBT rights would've been anathema to them. They were trying to see people as individuals not groups. We're they perfect? No that's why those amendments were set in place to protect racial minorities.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 13 queries.