Gay Marriage Now Legal Across The US

Language: JP EN DE FR
New Items
2023-11-19
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » Gay Marriage Now Legal Across the US
Gay Marriage Now Legal Across the US
First Page 2 3 ... 13 14
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-06-30 08:04:06
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Wormfeeder said: »
The bright side of this is that concealed carry permits are legal in all states now. New york city and chicago have to allow it now. I can hear the crying now, But what good for the goose. I can now go to newyork city and legally carry.

Yeah. You can legally conceal that firearm to shoot those roving gangs of gay hoodlums aggressively getting married in front of you. I can see the headline now.

"I stood my ground! I felt threatened by their love!"

Edit: Honestly, may or may not even apply to you personally. Speaking in the general "you". Making fun of the whole situation.

Carry concealed/open all you want, I think it changes little.
Offline
Posts: 42635
By Jetackuu 2015-06-30 08:10:02
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Eh as far as I'm concerned all regulations are unconstitutional, but let's not get into that tangent.
 Bahamut.Kara
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Kara
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2015-06-30 08:15:35
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bismarck.Snprphnx said: »
Allen West has already raised this argument, stemming from the SCOTUS ruling:

Quote:
"The Court used Section 1 of the Fourteen Amendment to justify its argument, which reads: Amendment XIV Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law, which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now here is the kicker, as the writer articulately brings to light: “By using the Constitution in such a manner, the Court argues that the Due Process Clause extends “certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy” accepted in a majority of states across the state lines of a handful of states that still banned the practice. The vast majority of states are “shall issue” on the matter of issuing concealed carry permits, and enjoy reciprocity with a large number of other states. My North Carolina concealed carry permit, for example, was recognized yesterday as being valid in 36 states, which just so happened to be the number of states in which gay marriage was legal yesterday. But 14 states did not recognize my concealed carry permit yesterday. Today they must."

It's an interesting argument. Many against it would say that the ruling is meant for the purpose of gay marriage. However, many times, the SCOTUS rulings are later applied to completely unrelated cases.
Erm, this isn't the first time the 14th amendment has been used to invalidate state laws.

I'm not sure why this case would make a difference for concealed carry permits when Roe vs. Wade, Loving vs. Virginia, or Brown vs. Board of Education didn't.

But I'm not familiar with supreme court historical rulings on concealed carry.
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-06-30 08:16:57
Link | Quote | Reply
 
It's an unrelated issue, he's just referencing it as it's also something the SCOTUS also ruled on.
 Bahamut.Kara
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Kara
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2015-06-30 08:21:24
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ramyrez said: »
It's an unrelated issue, he's just referencing it as it's also something the SCOTUS also ruled on.
Hmm?

As far as I can find the court is not ruling on concealed carry this year. He(the writer) is taking the case and applying it to concealed carry laws, arbitrarily.

Which is why I don't understand why previous 14th amendment cases wouldn't have opened this door already if this interpretation was true for concealed carry.

I can see the argument, I just don't see how it is different from court rulings 40 years ago.
 Bahamut.Kara
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Kara
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2015-06-30 08:24:23
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Wormfeeder said: »
Jetackuu said: »
Asura.Wormfeeder said: »
Drama Torama said: »
Sylph.Kawar said: »
It is about time took us to dam long to pass this bill

That's now how the Supreme Court works.
It is not the supreme courts job to make law, their job is to interpret law to make decisions based on the constitutionality of the law.
Which is exactly what they did.
But it isnt their job for this, like abortion gay marriage is an issue for the states. There is no mention in the constitution about marriage or abortion hence it is an issue for the states

They were based on previous interpretations of the 14th amendment.

Loving vs. Virginia made marriage a fundamental right in a 9-0 ruling.

The body of law in the US is based on the constitution and presedence cases
[+]
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-06-30 08:29:21
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Ramyrez said: »
It's an unrelated issue, he's just referencing it as it's also something the SCOTUS also ruled on.
Hmm?

As far as I can find the court is not ruling on concealed carry this year. It's taking the case and applying it to concealed carry laws, arbitrarily.

Which is why I don't understand why previous 14th amendment cases wouldn't have opened this door already if this interpretation was true.

I can see the argument, I just don't see how it is different from court rulings 40 years ago.

Oh, ah. I see now what he's doing. I misunderstood. I knew they ruled on a firearms issue not that long ago, but he's saying that the local laws can't be enforced because SCOTUS has said that the local laws can't trump the federal ruling.

I'm with you. I can see the argument there, but don't see how anything changes.

I can see how people are pouting and trying to be literalists and squeeze some sort of hollow victory out of this "defeat".

A "defeat" that, I remind them again, is based on them being against the rights of people in love to share equality under the law because they think it should be a state right to legislate hate.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2015-06-30 08:55:27
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Gay marriage that story is so like four days ago ! Time to move on people.
[+]
 Asura.Wormfeeder
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 470
By Asura.Wormfeeder 2015-06-30 09:03:54
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ramyrez said: »
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Ramyrez said: »
It's an unrelated issue, he's just referencing it as it's also something the SCOTUS also ruled on.
Hmm?

As far as I can find the court is not ruling on concealed carry this year. It's taking the case and applying it to concealed carry laws, arbitrarily.

Which is why I don't understand why previous 14th amendment cases wouldn't have opened this door already if this interpretation was true.

I can see the argument, I just don't see how it is different from court rulings 40 years ago.

Oh, ah. I see now what he's doing. I misunderstood. I knew they ruled on a firearms issue not that long ago, but he's saying that the local laws can't be enforced because SCOTUS has said that the local laws can't trump the federal ruling.

I'm with you. I can see the argument there, but don't see how anything changes.

I can see how people are pouting and trying to be literalists and squeeze some sort of hollow victory out of this "defeat".

A "defeat" that, I remind them again, is based on them being against the rights of people in love to share equality under the law because they think it should be a state right to legislate hate.
i dont think of it as a defeat, i believe people should be able to do what tgey want in the pursuit of their happiness as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. And hurting someones feels doesn't apply. Everyone talks about tolerance but few people actually practice it. If people want others to be tolerant of the way they live their lives then they have to be tolerant of people who oppose those views and if they dont then they are just hypocrites.
 Asura.Wormfeeder
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 470
By Asura.Wormfeeder 2015-06-30 09:05:04
Link | Quote | Reply
 
fonewear said: »
Gay marriage that story is so like four days ago ! Time to move on people.

Yeah dont we all have adhd and supposed to have gotten bored with this already.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-06-30 09:05:14
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Wormfeeder said: »
i dont think of it as a defeat, i believe people should be able to do what tgey want in the pursuit of their happiness as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. And hurting someones feels doesn't apply. Everyone talks about tolerance but few people actually practice it. If people want others to be tolerant of the way they live their lives then they have to be tolerant of people who oppose those views and if they dont then they are just hypocrites.

Every word you just said supports SCOTUS' decision in this case.

Being against gay marriage is all feels. No matter how many times you say it's about states rights, or tradition, or "reason".
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2015-06-30 09:07:17
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Wormfeeder said: »
fonewear said: »
Gay marriage that story is so like four days ago ! Time to move on people.

Yeah dont we all have adhd and supposed to have gotten bored with this already.

I forgot about it but ABC NBC CNN and Huff post has to keep it in the news every single day.
Offline
Posts: 42635
By Jetackuu 2015-06-30 11:09:40
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Wormfeeder said: »
i dont think of it as a defeat, i believe people should be able to do what tgey want in the pursuit of their happiness as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. And hurting someones feels doesn't apply. Everyone talks about tolerance but few people actually practice it. If people want others to be tolerant of the way they live their lives then they have to be tolerant of people who oppose those views and if they dont then they are just hypocrites.
No, being intolerant of intolerance doesn't make one a hypocrite.
[+]
 Bahamut.Omael
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Omael
Posts: 400
By Bahamut.Omael 2015-06-30 15:10:56
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Jetackuu said: »
No, being intolerant of intolerance doesn't make one a hypocrite.

Your intolerance of my intolerance will not be tolerated.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2015-06-30 15:24:16
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Omael said: »
Jetackuu said: »
No, being intolerant of intolerance doesn't make one a hypocrite.

Your intolerance of my intolerance will not be tolerated.

My intolerance of your intolerance is tolerant !
[+]
First Page 2 3 ... 13 14
Log in to post.