Tenth Circuit: Gay marriage protected by the Constitution (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 31, 2024, 06:38:19 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Tenth Circuit: Gay marriage protected by the Constitution (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Tenth Circuit: Gay marriage protected by the Constitution  (Read 2517 times)
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


« on: June 26, 2014, 01:29:09 AM »

No it's not!!! Our founding fathers would never have thought of this. Ever. This is judicial TYRANNY. Plain and simple! Even folks who support SSM can see that!

You do know that the Founding Fathers didn't write the Fourteenth Amendment, right?
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


« Reply #1 on: June 26, 2014, 12:53:48 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

of course. But I don't see anything in there about marriage.

Do you see anything in there about public schools?

Or public transportation?
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2014, 01:26:37 PM »
« Edited: June 26, 2014, 03:03:20 PM by Barnes »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

of course. But I don't see anything in there about marriage.

Do you see anything in there about public schools?

Or public transportation?

Article I Section 8 Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

If we aren't going to require amending the constitution so as to allow us to have an air force in addition to an army and a navy, I say that clause can easily be interpreted broadly enough to justify any sort of transportation expenditure.

The point of the argument was the maintainence of equal protection under laws - such as in public schools and in access to transportation (Browder v. Gayle, 1956). The section on post roads would have had no relevance to that case and to my knowledge hasn't in any rate been used as the main justification for public infrastructure and transport projects.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.017 seconds with 11 queries.