Now that we're back in power, can we turn the tide on the war on marriage?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by 3link, Nov 6, 2014.

  1. 3link

    3link Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    10,813
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now that the republicans are back in power, it's time we make an effort to fight back on the war on marriage. Here are my proposals:

    1). Pass a law limiting the jurisdiction of federal district courts. They can no longer hear the gay cases.
    2). Begin impeachment proceedings against the radical leftist judges who ruled in favor of gay marriage. It's time they answered to the people.
     
  2. willburroughs

    willburroughs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    324
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Good luck with that.
     
  3. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    32,222
    Likes Received:
    12,253
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, because not all Republicans are Conservatives who are anti-gay marriage. A true Republican can support SSM.
     
  4. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nice. I like it. I mean it seems to throw the Constitution down the toilet and flush it repeatedly on many levels but those two proposals have "sexy fascism" written all over them.
     
  5. 3link

    3link Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    10,813
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The constitution gives congress the power to define the jurisdiction of the Article III courts.
     
  6. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course. That is what makes these proposals so incredibly sexy. Take away forms of redress and petitions guaranteed in the Constitution and add more government regulation of the personal lives of consenting adults. That is smoking hot, tenting my Levis sort of stuff right there.
     
    Jonsa and (deleted member) like this.
  7. RedWolf

    RedWolf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    7,363
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Care to explain the negative impact that gay marriage is having on our economy or nation?
     
  8. 3link

    3link Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    10,813
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is bringing about the moral decay of our nation. I don't know if that affects our economy. But it sure makes us look weak.
     
  9. RedWolf

    RedWolf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    7,363
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How so?
     
  10. 3link

    3link Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    10,813
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Have you read the bible?
     
  11. RedWolf

    RedWolf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    7,363
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes but that doesn't answer my question. Oh, you think everyone should be beholden to what the bible says? No thanks, I believe in freedom.
     
  12. Casper

    Casper Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Messages:
    12,540
    Likes Received:
    72
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Nope you would not be able to do either, you already lost that war unfortunately many Cons are too stupid to know it. Pssst, You are not the People. LOL
     
  13. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,882
    Likes Received:
    2,872
    Trophy Points:
    113
    None of that is needed. The homosexuals are going to lose in the Supreme Court anyway.
     
  14. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here is the problem with #1 though. If the case comes to them under the guise of a Constitutional problem then Congress cannot remove their jurisdiction to hear it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Actually they are both outlined in the Constitution so unless you believe the Constitution is a fascist document you would be wrong.
     
  15. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you say so.
     
  16. YouLie

    YouLie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,177
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    In my opinion, that is a lost battle in the cultural war. I'd just assume let those who want to explain why homosexual acts are immoral to be able to explain themselves without being hindered by brown-shirt activist, both on the bench and in the legislatures.
     
  17. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think step one should be for the states affected to nullify the gay marriage rulings of these activist judges, and declare that they will enforce their state's own laws on marriage. Concurrently, the Republicans in DC should begin acting on the proposals you mentioned.

    In fact, of all the things that should happen in the next two years, I believe this issue to be the most important of all. These gay marriage rulings are a perversion of government that defies all common sense, and a symbol of the hyper-liberalism that has infected our country over the last six years.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Not with Kennedy sitting on the bench.
     
  18. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They've already won. That's why they upheld the appellate rulings.
     
  19. Wolverine

    Wolverine New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    16,105
    Likes Received:
    234
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How you guys just drop dead issues like gay marriage and abortion and move onto things that actually matter?
     
  20. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Depends on how the case is brought. If it comes as a civil right issue he will go for it but if its a states rights issue he will definitely vote against it. He is the biggest states rights guy to sit on the bench since the Civil War era.

    And believe me, the lawyers who are putting together these cases know this as well. If you get even one states rights case in front of the Supreme Court the whole gay marriage thing is gone. It will be relegated to individual states and basically meaningless.
     
  21. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The whole gay marriage garbage will drive the Jihadists more nuts than they are, it isn't our foreign policy but our social policy that gets them going.
     
  22. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,882
    Likes Received:
    2,872
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's exactly correct. Anybody who has read the DOMA decision and doesn't have a gay marriage agenda to push can see that.
     
  23. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,882
    Likes Received:
    2,872
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They didn't uphold the appellate rulings. They punted on the issue to be decided at a later date. Upholding the rulings would entail validating the rulings through a trial like the homosexuals WANTED them to do and they rejected.

    All this means is that it goes to the Supreme Court at a later date.
     
  24. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Many analysts, and I tend to agree with them, believe they "punted" this issue precisely because they did not like how it was brought to the Court. They think that the Court is waiting for the right case to come to them so they can issue the ruling they want. Bob Woodward wrote a fantastic book about how the Supreme Courts inner workings operate through interviewing various interns and other personal and he stated that in 99% of the cases, the Justices already know which way they will decide.

    Any way you view this, it is not good for the gay marriage advocates that the Supreme Court extended the debate on this issue.
     
  25. Draco

    Draco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    11,096
    Likes Received:
    3,393
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And this ladies and gentleman is why it swings from right to left and left to right again and again.

    If you push this nonsense, you will lose in the long run.

    The funny thing it's you same people who are so upset (rightfully so) that Obama care continues with less than half the countries support.

    According to Gallup it's 55/42 for gay marriage and will only get stronger. Why don't you stick to the stuff you righties are good at.

    Get our economy running again and taxes lowered PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!

    At least before you screw it up with social issues and give power back to the Dems.

    I beg you, economy first
     

Share This Page