Skip to comments.
Why Not Overturn Obergefell?
American Greatness ^
| July 4, 2022
| Matthew Boose
Posted on 07/05/2022 7:17:00 AM PDT by redfog
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 last
To: redfog
61
posted on
07/05/2022 11:37:17 AM PDT
by
T Ruth
(Mohammedanism shall be destroyed.)
To: DoodleDawg
As I suggested in my post #58, I doubt that SCOTUS would overturn a ruling on the basis of a single baker or florist who was specifically targeted for harassment by gay activists who could have simply gone to a different baker or florist. The harm was negligible (more criminal than civil), and the response (overturning gay marriage) would be a sledgehammer approach to a flyswatter problem.
That said, a church, synagogue, or mosque that sued on the grounds that performing a gay marriage violated their 1st amendment "free exercise" of their religion would have the appropriate Constitutional standing. Societally, however, I can't see such a religious group withstanding the extremist activist outcry and targeting by making such a challenge.
-PJ
62
posted on
07/05/2022 11:50:42 AM PDT
by
Political Junkie Too
( * LAAP = Left-wing Activist Agitprop Press (formerly known as the MSM))
To: aquila48
Yes, “traditional marriage” (which I would restore if I could) is enormously unpopular.
Traditional marriage means no divorce, sexual exclusivity (adultery is a crime), no child support for bastards.
Since what we have now is “gay marriage for straight people”, I almost have to concede the discrimination point.
63
posted on
07/05/2022 12:08:29 PM PDT
by
Jim Noble
(I’ve stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains)
To: circlecity
I think it would require a legislative body to pass a law.
A county clerk refusing to sign a marriage certificate might work.
To: Dilbert San Diego
If same sex marriage were overturned, then the proponents of homosexual marriage would then make the case for that legal status, state by state. Some states would allow same sex marriage. Some would not. The Trouble here is that the Constitution requires that other states recognize things like "marriages" from other states.
It's all or nothing.
65
posted on
07/05/2022 3:19:51 PM PDT
by
DiogenesLamp
("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
To: NorthMountain; DoodleDawg
Good luck demonstrating "standing". It's the same problem as suing to enforce elections laws. Leftist judges deny anyone has "standing" to bring a case. Many courts are just lying sacks of sh*t, and it's long past time we started treating courts with disrespect. They are garbage, and most conservatives know that the courts are garbage.
Liars, dirtbags and idiots. That's what many of the courts are nowadays.
66
posted on
07/05/2022 3:25:01 PM PDT
by
DiogenesLamp
("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
To: DiogenesLamp
And you pinged me to this because...? I already know how much you hate the judiciary. Very Confederate of you.
To: Boogieman
Not that I don’t agree, but, replace gay man with “woman”. Who then marries a straight man and you have to cover hubby, are you going to claim injury?
I think it has to be more about not the fedgov business is more and more
68
posted on
07/05/2022 3:31:09 PM PDT
by
Manly Warrior
(US ARMY (Ret), "No Free Lunches for the Dogs of War" )
To: DoodleDawg
Religious reasons. Any county clerk can say that issuing a license under their signature violates their religious beliefs. Where is Kim Davis when you need her? After the gaystapo has persecuted so many people, it is possible that it may be difficult to find people brave enough to stand up to them nowadays.
And again, thanks to the lying, sacks of sh*t courts.
69
posted on
07/05/2022 3:32:35 PM PDT
by
DiogenesLamp
("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
To: DoodleDawg
Regarding the Judiciary as garbage is a pretty common conservative trait, and has been since we started noticing how they will
LIE, such as in Roe v Wade.
Obergefell is just another crap decision from liars.
70
posted on
07/05/2022 4:13:25 PM PDT
by
DiogenesLamp
("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
To: Manly Warrior
“are you going to claim injury?”
Not under Obergefell, since Obergefell didn’t cause that.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson