Student challenges Bachmann on marriage

which activist liberal judges can overturn

which is ok....when YOU agree.

so youre in favor of activist liberal jduges ignoring the will of the people, if its not YOUR will they are ignoring.

 

Bachmann: “They can get married, but they abide by the same laws as everyone else. They can marry a man if they’re a woman, and they can marry a woman if they’re a man.”

Maybe someone should tell Michele that gay marriage is the law in Iowa.

 

thats idiotic, but I dont think the claims it could lead to polygamy are that far fetched...

and I dont care in the slightest.

 

You can certainly see why Bachman would insist that gay adults marry straight partners or not at all.

 

Sure.

Was the Dred Scott decision OK with you?

 

I think that is a great point.

However, "society" may be on the brink of changing it's mind regarding gay marriage.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/03/news/la-pn-pew-same-sex-marriage-20111103

I can only surmise that you will continue to respect society's will even after it changes.

 

which is hilarious when you contrast it with :

so basically miscegenation laws didnt violate the 14th because blacks can still marry blacks and whites can still marry whites.

 

Are you claiming that gay Americans are NOT US citizens?

 

no. are you suggesting there were not actually slavery laws in the US at that time?

otherwise how can they be activist judges for upholding actual US law?

 

We already answered that several posts back.

They are as much citizens as a brother and sister who want to get married.

Or a father and daughter.

 

gays and straights are punished equally the same way blacks and whites were

 

Dred Scott was about a slave suing for his freedom.. The issue was that he COULDN'T sue because he wasn't a US citizen.

 

Irrelevent...we once allowed Heroine and now we have decided that it's wrong.

 

lol we didnt decide that legal herion violated the 14th amendment did we?

 

They may not have been activist judges at that time.

I only suggested that the courts are not always right.

But I've never said that there was no need for a judiciary at all.

Sometimes the courts abuse their power and sometimes they don't.

 

Really? Gays can't vote? Gays get lynched and hung from trees? Gays can't find jobs? Gays can't join the military? Gays can't get a mortgage or a home in a nice area? I think not.

 

Denying blacks the ability to marry because of their race is discriminating against them based on genetics.

Not the same with homosexuality since it has never been proven to be genetic.

 

We decided that Heroine violates the laws of morality when used for recreational purposes.

 

And once again Race is a genetic factor. Homosexuality is not. You cannot equate the two when they share nothing between them.


I see Margot ran away when I challenged her on that BS claim about 4 sons.

Smart move Margot.

 

Who cares? If its not genetic, why do you still deny me the right to contract in a homosexual relationship with another partner?

 

Um ... because it's icky?

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13555604/ns/health-health_care/t/men-older-brothers-more-likely-be-gay/

excerpt:

“It’s likely to be a prenatal effect,” said Anthony F. Bogaert of Brock University in St. Catharines, Canada, “This and other studies suggest that there is probably a biological basis for” homosexuality.

S. Marc Breedlove of Michigan State University said the finding “absolutely” confirms a physical basis.

“Anybody’s first guess would have been that the older brothers were having an effect socially, but this data doesn’t support that,” Breedlove said in a telephone interview.

Men with older brothers more likely to be gay
I see Margot ran away when I challenged her on that BS claim about 4 sons.

 

Because if there is no standard for justification for marriage it opens it up to everyone of any age or number of people.

You can't hide behind existing law that bans some forms of marriage when you want to abolish current law that blocks gay marriage.

 

I would call it disgusting - with or without the defective homosexual gene.

 

LOL Love these "studies"

From your own quote:


“It’s likely to be a prenatal effect,”


"Likely" is not evidence. Its a hypothesis with no factual backing.

The same goes for "probably" and "might" which are both used in the article repeatedly.

Thanks for making it so easy Margot.