Alito, Thomas hint they would overturn same sex marriage if presented opportunity

[zigbee]

Refused to hear Kim Davis case from Kentucky, who refused to grant marriage licenses to same sex couples.  Would overturn Obergefell.....WHY?   There is not one damn thing in the constitution about same sex marriage.  You have to read in the 5th amendment and the 14th amendment of equal protection clause and how those civil war amendments were created to IMPOSE the Bill of Rights onto the states.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/thomas-...x-marriage

[P1tchblack]

There's not one damn thing in the Constitution about straight marriage, either.

[zigbee]

There's not one damn thing in the Constitution about straight marriage, either.

Then let the states decide.  Pretty easy really.

[P1tchblack]

There's not one damn thing in the Constitution about straight marriage, either.

Then let the states decide.  Pretty easy really.

It's a difficult situation, because should we have allowed States to individually decide on allowing slavery?

[zigbee]

There's not one damn thing in the Constitution about straight marriage, either.

Then let the states decide.  Pretty easy really.

It's a difficult situation, because should we have allowed States to individually decide on allowing slavery?

THERE IS an amendment in the constitution for this.  You just said there is nothing on marriage....pretty simple really.  States decide amendments.   Courts made this decision absent anything of the government law on marriage.  Want a marriage amendment?  Do like they did on slavery and created one and vote....otherwise let states decide.

[P1tchblack]

There's not one damn thing in the Constitution about straight marriage, either.

Then let the states decide.  Pretty easy really.

It's a difficult situation, because should we have allowed States to individually decide on allowing slavery?

THERE IS an amendment in the constitution for this.  You just said there is nothing on marriage....pretty simple really.  States decide amendments.   Courts made this decision absent anything of the government law on marriage.  Want a marriage amendment?  Do like they did on slavery and created one and vote....otherwise let states decide.

Do you believe the government of any state should be able to discriminate? If you support allowing states to decide gay marriage rights, you are pretty much allowing state government's to discriminate

[zigbee]

There's not one damn thing in the Constitution about straight marriage, either.

Then let the states decide.  Pretty easy really.

It's a difficult situation, because should we have allowed States to individually decide on allowing slavery?

THERE IS an amendment in the constitution for this.  You just said there is nothing on marriage....pretty simple really.  States decide amendments.   Courts made this decision absent anything of the government law on marriage.  Want a marriage amendment?  Do like they did on slavery and created one and vote....otherwise let states decide.

Do you believe the government of any state should be able to discriminate? If you support allowing states to decide gay marriage rights, you are pretty much allowing states to discriminate

Your question now has zero to do with law.  Zero, so you twist and turn as you are cornered with your own reply.

[P1tchblack]

Then let the states decide.  Pretty easy really.

It's a difficult situation, because should we have allowed States to individually decide on allowing slavery?

THERE IS an amendment in the constitution for this.  You just said there is nothing on marriage....pretty simple really.  States decide amendments.   Courts made this decision absent anything of the government law on marriage.  Want a marriage amendment?  Do like they did on slavery and created one and vote....otherwise let states decide.

Do you believe the government of any state should be able to discriminate? If you support allowing states to decide gay marriage rights, you are pretty much allowing states to discriminate

Your question now has zero to do with law.  Zero, so you twist and turn as you are cornered with your own reply.

My question relates to reality. there's a difference between the federal government allowing state governments to discriminate and state governments allowing churches to discriminate. If not the US supreme court, who do we have to hold state governments accountable when they do something wrong?

[zigbee]

It's a difficult situation, because should we have allowed States to individually decide on allowing slavery?

THERE IS an amendment in the constitution for this.  You just said there is nothing on marriage....pretty simple really.  States decide amendments.   Courts made this decision absent anything of the government law on marriage.  Want a marriage amendment?  Do like they did on slavery and created one and vote....otherwise let states decide.

Do you believe the government of any state should be able to discriminate? If you support allowing states to decide gay marriage rights, you are pretty much allowing states to discriminate

Your question now has zero to do with law.  Zero, so you twist and turn as you are cornered with your own reply.

My question relates to reality. there's a difference between the federal government allowing state governments to discriminate and state governments allowing churches to discriminate. If not the US supreme court, who do we have to hold state governments accountable when they do something wrong?

There is a difference is deciding what is in the constitution and what is not.   This is where we are.   Anything NOT designated to the federal government is left to the states.  Learn some government when you have a chance...it's 9th grade civics really.

[P1tchblack]

THERE IS an amendment in the constitution for this.  You just said there is nothing on marriage....pretty simple really.  States decide amendments.   Courts made this decision absent anything of the government law on marriage.  Want a marriage amendment?  Do like they did on slavery and created one and vote....otherwise let states decide.

Do you believe the government of any state should be able to discriminate? If you support allowing states to decide gay marriage rights, you are pretty much allowing states to discriminate

Your question now has zero to do with law.  Zero, so you twist and turn as you are cornered with your own reply.

My question relates to reality. there's a difference between the federal government allowing state governments to discriminate and state governments allowing churches to discriminate. If not the US supreme court, who do we have to hold state governments accountable when they do something wrong?

There is a difference is deciding what is in the constitution and what is not.   This is where we are.   Anything NOT designated to the federal government is left to the states.  Learn some government when you have a chance...it's 9th grade civics really.

Is there anything in the Constitution about posting your thoughts on the internet, email or over smartphone apps without the government punishing you?

[zigbee]

Do you believe the government of any state should be able to discriminate? If you support allowing states to decide gay marriage rights, you are pretty much allowing states to discriminate

Your question now has zero to do with law.  Zero, so you twist and turn as you are cornered with your own reply.

My question relates to reality. there's a difference between the federal government allowing state governments to discriminate and state governments allowing churches to discriminate. If not the US supreme court, who do we have to hold state governments accountable when they do something wrong?

There is a difference is deciding what is in the constitution and what is not.   This is where we are.   Anything NOT designated to the federal government is left to the states.  Learn some government when you have a chance...it's 9th grade civics really.

Is there anything in the Constitution about posting your thoughts on the internet, email or over smartphone apps without the government punishing you?

First amendment....LOL...you get schooled all the time.

[P1tchblack]

Your question now has zero to do with law.  Zero, so you twist and turn as you are cornered with your own reply.

My question relates to reality. there's a difference between the federal government allowing state governments to discriminate and state governments allowing churches to discriminate. If not the US supreme court, who do we have to hold state governments accountable when they do something wrong?

There is a difference is deciding what is in the constitution and what is not.   This is where we are.   Anything NOT designated to the federal government is left to the states.  Learn some government when you have a chance...it's 9th grade civics really.

Is there anything in the Constitution about posting your thoughts on the internet, email or over smartphone apps without the government punishing you?

First amendment....LOL...you get schooled all the time.

Really, Mr ninth grade civics? Where in the Constitution are any of the three things I mentioned?

[zigbee]

My question relates to reality. there's a difference between the federal government allowing state governments to discriminate and state governments allowing churches to discriminate. If not the US supreme court, who do we have to hold state governments accountable when they do something wrong?

There is a difference is deciding what is in the constitution and what is not.   This is where we are.   Anything NOT designated to the federal government is left to the states.  Learn some government when you have a chance...it's 9th grade civics really.

Is there anything in the Constitution about posting your thoughts on the internet, email or over smartphone apps without the government punishing you?

First amendment....LOL...you get schooled all the time.

Really, Mr ninth grade civics. Where in the Constitution are any of the three things I mentioned?

First amendment....you are now looking foolish.

[P1tchblack]

There is a difference is deciding what is in the constitution and what is not.   This is where we are.   Anything NOT designated to the federal government is left to the states.  Learn some government when you have a chance...it's 9th grade civics really.

Is there anything in the Constitution about posting your thoughts on the internet, email or over smartphone apps without the government punishing you?

First amendment....LOL...you get schooled all the time.

Really, Mr ninth grade civics. Where in the Constitution are any of the three things I mentioned?

First amendment....you are now looking foolish.

Perfect! Please paste the wording from the first amendment that discusses the internet, email or smartphone apps. I'll be waiting...

[zigbee]

Is there anything in the Constitution about posting your thoughts on the internet, email or over smartphone apps without the government punishing you?

First amendment....LOL...you get schooled all the time.

Really, Mr ninth grade civics. Where in the Constitution are any of the three things I mentioned?

First amendment....you are now looking foolish.

Perfect! Please paste the wording from the first amendment that discusses the internet, email or smartphone apps. I'll be waiting...

Don't have too.  It's there in freedom of speech....your really silly attempt to win an argument you are losing bigly could go down a rabbit hole of where does it say I can eat a sandwich?  Or wear 2 different shoes?   Just really stupidity to say where is the email/send letters or talk on the phone,  or such in constitution when the first amendment allows for it.  I'm not going off on some silly stuff for 25 pages...you can prattle to yourself about where in the constitution does it say I can drive a green car?  Or live with a monkey...or have a cat...silliness.   
Again, let states decide this issue or pass an amendment.  Pretty simple stuff...9th grade civics.