SCOTUS

57Brave said:
?
Click to expand...

If you think marriage is nothing but a "contract," why was there so much angst over civil unions?

I'm arguing the supreme court has no business ruling in a case about marriage. When you can point to the constitutional authority that says they should, let me know
 
sturg33 said:
If you think marriage is nothing but a "contract," why was there so much angst over civil unions?

I'm arguing the supreme court has no business ruling in a case about marriage. When you can point to the constitutional authority that says they should, let me know
Click to expand...

Marriage is legally a contract.
Whether it should be or not is a totally different discussion

Until that changes, the courts will rule on marriage contracts
 
goldfly said:
Oh, you were saying that Bernie sanders was going to mug people

Got ya
Click to expand...

No... I was saying that a socialist mathematical illiterate who wants to take more money away from rich people without their consent is the equivalent of me robbing a guy on the street.

I know you disagree... but I'd love to know specifically why it's vastly different
 
sturg33 said:
I'm arguing the supreme court has no business ruling in a case about marriage. When you can point to the constitutional authority that says they should, let me know
Click to expand...

It's a bad argument but whatever

Article 4 section 1 of the document you say you love so much brings the Supreme Court fully into the party
 
sturg33 said:
No... I was saying that a socialist mathematical illiterate who wants to take more money away from rich people without their consent is the equivalent of me robbing a guy on the street.

I know you disagree... but I'd love to know specifically why it's vastly different
Click to expand...

How cute
 
sturg33 said:
I'm shocked... I ask for specifics... I get snark.
Click to expand...

We're these the words you meant to type?

Cause they don't really fit with the conversation thus far since you didn't ask anything

I did specifically tell you where the SC has the right to take cases

But again, that has nothing to do with how cute it is that you think taxes = stealing
 
sturg33 said:
If you think marriage is nothing but a "contract," why was there so much angst over civil unions?

I'm arguing the supreme court has no business ruling in a case about marriage. When you can point to the constitutional authority that says they should, let me know
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court made a ruling on Obergfell because lower courts had split on the constitutionality of certain state laws. Seems like the court was fulfilling its defined role. You might disagree with the conclusions, or with the majority's interpretation of the 14th Amendment, but it's tough to argue that the court had "no business" ruling in the case. It's precisely their business.
 
Marriage is simply not a defined role of the federal government. There is no constitutional mention of marriage. So how can there be a federal law deciding on it?
 
goldfly said:
We're these the words you meant to type?

Cause they don't really fit with the conversation thus far since you didn't ask anything

I did specifically tell you where the SC has the right to take cases

But again, that has nothing to do with how cute it is that you think taxes = stealing
Click to expand...

I asked you specifically why it is different
 
*

nor is real estate or lemon laws or medical malpractice or campaign finance or abortion etc etc etc
 
goldfly said:
How much work do you want me to do for you?

Which part of the section do you not understand when it comes to the debate?
Click to expand...

Maybe I should debate how you do when I ask you to help Bernie with his math..

It's uh, to change the system duuuude
 
57Brave said:
nor is real estate or lemon laws or medical malpractice or campaign finance or abortion etc etc etc
Click to expand...

Exactly... hopefully the next judge is picked based on how they would rule on actual constitutional authority... But I'm not naive enough to think that
 
you obviously never went to the trouble to google golds helpfull advise read:

Article IV
Section 1.

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top