The rights of the minority are not subject to a popular vote...

It doesn't matter how you feel the US Constitution is the law of the land, ratified treaties are the law of the land and amendments are the law of the land unless repealed. Courts interpret all these and decide how they apply when such are Constitutional matters and I pointed out with the treaty signed and the 14th Amendment and how its been used in the Courts they could easily say same sex and other marriages later are Constitutional. And a law like DOMA is subordinate to the US Constitution if that has protections and rights afforded over all other laws that is what the document is the Supreme Law of the Land.

Its a living document it changes and matures.

 

The Constitution is a "living document" because it can be changed through the legal amendment process. Democrats, those on the LEFT REJECT the Constitution. They REJECTED Article 1, Section 8 and the Tenth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled against the "New Deal" time after time, and the Democrats threatened them. The Supreme Court then started to REVERSE their decisions allowing the "New Deal." Democrats don't get to pick and choose what they follow in the Constitution. They are illegitimate as a party and movement.

 

Im not looking for it. The words used work just fine. "Men and women" have a right to marry. The UN didnt declare same sex marriage a human right and you people that believe they did only demonstrate how complete your detachment from reality has become.

 

So you agree that no limitation to opposite sex marriage exists in your quote then.

There's hope for you yet.

 

"Men and women" limits it to the opposite sex. Whereas almost every other stated universal human right is for all "persons".

 

Still not understanding how ANY licensed activity is a "RIGHT,,," I just don't understand...

 

Men and women encompasses all persons. If you can locate the word only in there, you might have a point. Until then, you don't

 

Gay marriage doesn't kill people; guns do.

 

So in your opinion, "the rights of the minority are not subject to a vote by the minority" have nothing to do with rights?

 

marriage isn't a constitutional right, owning a gun is.

 

Its tough to take a position since I'm not sure of the context of the quotes you gave in your initial post.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think anyone in here has said that it isn't.

 

I don't think context is important, it's a statement of political principle.

 

In order for me to take a position, its important to know the context given the political principal in which it was made.

 

apparently you who posted this

have trouble understanding that fact. Guns is protected under the constitution. Marriage isn't.

- - - Updated - - -

Dude gun owners are a minority. It's not that hard to figure out if you just use that noggin. They are a minority protected by the constitution who's rights you don't want protected while trying to protect those who don't have the right to marry to marry. There is no right to marry.

 

You missed the entire point.

 

????No, Men OR women would encompass all persons. "Men and women" limits marriage to "men and women". Words have meaning.

 

the word ONLY wold limit it to marriage between a man and woman. men and women encompasses all persons. If you could locate the word only, you might have a point. since you can't, you don't.

 

Your belief that the UN has declared marriage between two people of the same sex to be a universal human right, only demonstrates your detachment from reality

 

I can't help that you are unable to support your arguments. I'm sorry, I really am.

 

The text supports my argument. That's why in 65 years only once has someone <<< Mod Edit: Insult >>> sought redress through the UN.

 

perhaps you could point out the word only for us?

 

It's not there. Neither is 'license' or benefits', or could you not read Engrish?

 

But seriously... how many mass-murders have stemmed from granting gays the liberty of marrying one another, as opposed to the insane (but legal) proliferation of firearms in this society?

 

so then you don't believe that the rights of the minority are not, or should not, be subject to a vote?

 

I believe that the efficacy of granting homosexuals the right to marriage, is hardly comparable to that of granting certain liberties pertaining to firearms. Why that is so, is clear to many Americans intuitively.