Prop 8 ruled unconstitutional

Discussion in 'Politics' started by CptStern, Feb 7, 2012.

  1. CptStern suckmonkey

    Member Since:
    May 5, 2004
    Message Count:
    10,700
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Location:
    the internet[s]
  2. unozero Tank

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Message Count:
    3,474
    Trophy Points:
    52
    oh god won't someone think of the children?
    young boys will be sodomized on every street corner now!

    lol
  3. CptStern suckmonkey

    Member Since:
    May 5, 2004
    Message Count:
    10,700
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Location:
    the internet[s]
    to clarify:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46294255/ns/us_news-life/#.TzF0v-Q8f6V

    so supporters of prop 8 (re: religious people) would have to take this to the supreme court and prove that gay marriage directly harms the rest of the nation. good luck with that
  4. DEATHMASTER The Freeman

    Member Since:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Message Count:
    12,936
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    Maryland
    I just want to see one of their arguments in court

    proponent - "but what will we tell our children?"

    judge - "Are you ****ing kidding me, bitch?"
  5. Stigmata The Freeman

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2003
    Message Count:
    16,112
    Trophy Points:
    159
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Gay marriage affects the sales of wedding invitations, therefore it affects interstate commerce, therefore gay marriage may be federally regulated as per the Interstate Commerce Clause.
  6. DEATHMASTER The Freeman

    Member Since:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Message Count:
    12,936
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    Maryland
    Increases sales if anything.
  7. Bad^Hat The Freeman

    Member Since:
    May 13, 2003
    Message Count:
    20,293
    Trophy Points:
    159
    Location:
    New Zealand
    If gay people are allowed to marry how will I continue to indoctrinate my children against their lifestyle there I summed up their actual concern.
  8. Member Since:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Message Count:
    8,179
    Trophy Points:
    52
    Location:
    PHOENIX, ARIZONA USA
    It's not constitutional due to the first amendment of the constitution. If they want to change that, they must amend the US constitution and add a new line specifying that. They tried that before and it failed. That said- California doesn't have to be compelled to recognize those marriages, but they cannot BAN them.

    Based on this if the SCOTUS supports this lower courts decision, then what are the consequences for other state and federal actions taken without explicit constitutional approval such as drug laws. They use the commerce clause to justify the DEA as anti smuggling, what about product produced IN a state and not exported to another US state. Based on that I'd say the feds have NO jurisdiction. Arizona has already ruled on that for gun laws stating any firearms produced within AZ and not exported should not be subject to ATF restrictions based on Constitutional law. All gunsmiths still comply because they're terrified of the ATF destroying their lives.