Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31
  1. #11




    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    35
    Posts
    4,590
    SCF Rewards
    753
    Country
    Denver Broncos Montreal Canadiens Milwaukee Brewers
    See dmdean81's Items on eBay

    I saw a clip of this on youtube and it seem like the judges really did not want to decide this case one way or the other. I hope that they don't find some way of passing the buck off to the states. This is a human rights issue and even though some religions don't agree with homosexuality religion cannot ever stand in the way of human rights. If it does we are no better than any of the countries that we like to invade in the name of freedom.

    I think they want to pass the buck off to the next court members. I'm assuming the country is split in half and they don't want half the country to hate them. I think they need to grow a pair and make a ruling, one way or the other...

  2. #12




    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,528
    SCF Rewards
    459
    Country

    I think they want to pass the buck off to the next court members. I'm assuming the country is split in half and they don't want half the country to hate them. I think they need to grow a pair and make a ruling, one way or the other...

    Not like it's their JOB or anything! But I think you and Veg are right...I hope not though. I don't think the SCOTUS will make a ruling...again, hope I'm wrong.

  3. #13




    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    35
    Posts
    4,590
    SCF Rewards
    753
    Country
    Denver Broncos Montreal Canadiens Milwaukee Brewers
    See dmdean81's Items on eBay

    Not like it's their JOB or anything! But I think you and Veg are right...I hope not though. I don't think the SCOTUS will make a ruling...again, hope I'm wrong.

    I'm all for gay marriage! Just get this over with. There are problems 1000x more important than this that need to be fixed/addressed!

  4. #14





    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,461
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)
    Country

    I'm all for gay marriage! Just get this over with. There are problems 1000x more important than this that need to be fixed/addressed!

    Gay marriage isn't even a problem. The fight against it is.

  5. #15







    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    54
    Posts
    19,098
    SCF Rewards
    1,943
    Blog Entries
    6
    Country

    I can't remember which judge said it, but the point was made by one of them questioning whether or not they should overrule a majority vote by a states population. Regardless of the subject, I agree with this. I would see it the same way if there was a majority vote in favor of gay marriage. I do not see the logic in the SC over ruling what the people of a state decided in a vote. This is skirting states rights legal issues.

  6. #16




    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,528
    SCF Rewards
    459
    Country

    I can't remember which judge said it, but the point was made by one of them questioning whether or not they should overrule a majority vote by a states population. Regardless of the subject, I agree with this. I would see it the same way if there was a majority vote in favor of gay marriage. I do not see the logic in the SC over ruling what the people of a state decided in a vote. This is skirting states rights legal issues.

    Your point is understood, Duane. However, I am by no means relating the severity of the issues, but if states were allowed to vote on slavery, where would we be?

  7. #17





    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,461
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)
    Country

    I can't remember which judge said it, but the point was made by one of them questioning whether or not they should overrule a majority vote by a states population. Regardless of the subject, I agree with this. I would see it the same way if there was a majority vote in favor of gay marriage. I do not see the logic in the SC over ruling what the people of a state decided in a vote. This is skirting states rights legal issues.

    That is a valid point, especially since you guys are all about state's rights. But this issue has both state and federal implications, so I don't see how one can avoid it being decided on a federal level.
    Also, if SCOTUS decides that banning gay marriage is unconstitutional, are you saying it's a state's right to go against said constitution?
    Remember my argument about the second amendment? I find it funny that no one who was arguing with me pointed out that SCOTUS had put the matter of the second amendment's meaning to bed in the 70s (I think). Personally, I think it's just another example of people ignoring the constitution and focussing on politics and what they want instead, but the fact of the matter is SCOTUS made a ruling and it stands. Same goes for Roe v Wade.
    If SCOTUS deems it unconstitutional to not recognize gay marriage, what right does any state within the union have to go against that?

  8. #18







    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    54
    Posts
    19,098
    SCF Rewards
    1,943
    Blog Entries
    6
    Country

    Your point is understood, Duane. However, I am by no means relating the severity of the issues, but if states were allowed to vote on slavery, where would we be?

    I get your point, but no state ever held a public vote to allow or abolish slavery (to my knowledge). Perhaps had the people been allowed to vote it would have been abolished much earlier than it was.

  9. #19





    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,461
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)
    Country

    I get your point, but no state ever held a public vote to allow or abolish slavery (to my knowledge). Perhaps had the people been allowed to vote it would have been abolished much earlier than it was.

    Well when you have a state that abolished slavery last month...yeah, it's hard to argue that.

  10. #20







    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    54
    Posts
    19,098
    SCF Rewards
    1,943
    Blog Entries
    6
    Country

    That is a valid point, especially since you guys are all about state's rights. But this issue has both state and federal implications, so I don't see how one can avoid it being decided on a federal level.
    Also, if SCOTUS decides that banning gay marriage is unconstitutional, are you saying it's a state's right to go against said constitution?
    Remember my argument about the second amendment? I find it funny that no one who was arguing with me pointed out that SCOTUS had put the matter of the second amendment's meaning to bed in the 70s (I think). Personally, I think it's just another example of people ignoring the constitution and focussing on politics and what they want instead, but the fact of the matter is SCOTUS made a ruling and it stands. Same goes for Roe v Wade.
    If SCOTUS deems it unconstitutional to not recognize gay marriage, what right does any state within the union have to go against that?

    The precedent of states going against what the Fed says is not unheard of. Fed laws says that marijuana is a controlled substance and it is illegal to possess or use it, yet we just had the population of Colorado and Washington vote to pass laws that make it legal to possess and use in your home for recreational purposes.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
SCF Sponsors


About SCF

    Sports Card Forum provides sports and non-sports card collectors a safe place to discuss, buy, sell and trade.

    SCF maintains tools that will allow collectors to manage their collections online, information about what is happening with the hobby, as well as providing robust data to send out for Autographs through the mail.

Follow SCF on