IRS.FBI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons   
   XPost: alt.revisionism, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.politics.immigration, alt.true-crime, alt.politics.guns   
   XPost: misc.survivalism, soc.culture.usa, alt.survival   
   From: I-WAS-JUST-GANG-PROBED-BY-THE-ObamaRegime-SPY-NETWORK@IRS.   
   BI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov   
      
   On 2/1/2015 10:25 PM, Free Lunch wrote:   
   > On Sun, 1 Feb 2015 14:53:16 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >> "Free Lunch"  wrote in message   
   >> news:6l7tcadi24usmurshblgidr6ibnfg3e6rq@4ax.com...   
   >>>   
   >>> Gays have the same right to marry as all other Americans. Bigots lie   
   >>> when they allege that there is something special about allowing gays to   
   >>> marry and get all upset when it is pointed out that the laws that have   
   >>> been overturned are the ones that are discriminatory and shameful.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Yes, apparently in your universe this is true. In my universe they do not.   
   >> If I was a justice sitting on the USSC, I'd not give gays the time of day.   
   >   
   > That's because you are a bigot.   
   >   
   >> The laws that have been overturned are one that have no support from the   
   >> respective state constitutions.   
   >   
   > State constitutions never trump the 14th Amendment.   
      
   The 14th amendment is directed at the States and at government....  But   
   Federal government doesn't have any power to regulate Marriage. Show me   
   the delegated power that allows regulation of private personal Marriage.   
      
   The fact government chooses to recognize the "personal marriage" of two   
   people is not a constitutional power to regulate it.   
      
   And so Marriage doesn't need to to be regulated, government needs to be   
   regulated and if they can't engage in marriage because it's NOT equal   
   and because it's a religious ceremony then government is what needs to   
   change NOT private marriage.   
      
   All government can do is to no longer participate in marriage licensing   
   and marriage ceremonies. And in fact 3 counties in Florida have done   
   just that and they no longer issue any Marriage licenses and they also   
   do NOT "perform" the ceremony.   
      
      
      
   >   
   >> I believe that when the voters pass an amendment to their constitutions,   
   >> then the laws that bar gay marriage are permissible. Indeed, if the   
   >   
   > Your beliefs are of no consequence when it comes to how our constitution   
   > works.   
   >   
      
   It's *States Rights* and there is an argument that the States are NOT   
   discriminating but that gays can marry just as incestuous people (people   
   that are sexually aroused by close genetic ties) can marry...   
      
   Just NOT someone of the same gender or the same direct familial genetics.   
      
   They are equally prohibited Among all people in the State.   
      
   Is it right that a father daughter or sister brother that love each   
   other can't get married and raise children?   
      
   >> constitution of a state bars gay marriage, then no law is needed. States   
   >> that had laws did not have constitutional justification in those states to   
   >> support the legislation that barred gay marriage. THIS IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE   
   >> THAN THE US CONSTITUTION. The US constitution hasd not been challenged as of   
   >> this moment. That is, the challenge is just now making its way before the   
   >> court. None of the previous challenges have beenjudged against the US   
   >> constitution. all have been judged against their respective states. Having   
   >> said that, California voters passed an amendment to define marriage in this   
   >> state that was over ruled by a federal court. I believe this is decision is   
   >> in error.   
   >>   
   >> The Feds attempted to bar gay marriage with the DOMA, but there is no   
   >> constitutional power to do this. To ban gay marriage in the United States,   
   >> we will need a constitutional amendment,   
      
   NO, but to have a Federal ban you need an amendment to the U.S.   
   constitution. States can limit what they recognize.... like incest or   
   gay marriage or polygamy which are a type of marriage NOT a person who   
   has to be treated equal.  A person isn't gay...   
   *the sex they have is gay sex* . Just as   
   *a pedophile isn't a new gender* it is a style of sex like heterosexual   
   is a style of sex NOT a gender so a sex act has NO 14th amendment   
   rights.  A race is genetic but a sexual preference, like a flavor of ice   
   cream is NOT. The fact you like vanilla ice cream doesn't make you a new   
   gender or race or a vanilla flavored person with Vanilla rights like the   
   Liberals say you are a gay person with gay rights.   
      
   *There is no such thing as a gay person* and therefore   
   *no such thing as gay rights* or equal rights for gays under the 14th   
   amendment. That would be like saying there are "Vanilla Right".   
      
   >> but I do not expect such an effort   
   >> to be successful. The result is that gay marriage is on the horizon.   
   >>   
   >> I believe that slavery is a horrible injustice that one man can levy upon   
   >> another, but if this issue had become the topic of an amendment to the   
   >> constitution and had survived the snowball's-chance-in-Hell of passing, then   
   >> slavery would be a legal institution until such time as another amendment   
   >> passed to make it illegal. We might not like the decisions we make, but they   
   >> are binding until we decide otherwise. Some things are not the purview of   
   >> the court, even if we do no tlike them. Gay marriage could be made illegal   
   >> by an amendment to the US Constitution, although there is a snoball's chance   
   >> in Hell of that happening.   
   >   
   > The 14th Amendment tells us that states cannot discriminate.   
      
   Against who or what?  That is the Question, who or what is "gay"?   
      
      
   > The refusal   
   > to grant same sex marriage is discrimination.   
      
   NOT at all, it is the same as incestuous marriages or Vanilla ice cream   
   marriages.  They can be banned by States and so can pedophilia   
   marriages.  Because they're like gay marriages, they have nothing to do   
   with a race or gender.   Sexual orientation is NOT protected by the 14th   
   amendment any more than liking vanilla ice cream is protected.   
      
   > You have made it clear   
   > that you agree that it is. Bigots are anti-American.   
      
   discrimination is how we stay alive, but you mean "Racial or Gender"   
   discrimination and it is neither of those.   
      
   Gays that change their gender can get married to each other.   
      
   Or they can find someone of the opposite gender to marry.   
      
   Government Marriage isn't about love it's a legal document and love   
   can't be quantified in a legal document so it can't be discriminated   
   against.  You can't describe what is being discriminated against to   
   prove that it's a race or a gender.   
      
   Gay marriage is like the Spaghetti Monster being a God, it's a poor   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)