Posted on 02/09/2015 6:49:01 AM PST by alancarp
That’s the problem with allowing 9 robes oldies to dictate what you may or may not do.
Alabama and the rest of the states of the Union: DON’T ACQUIESCE to unconstitutional federal government tyranny.
SCOTUS’ ONLY legitimate role in this is to overturn the lower federal court’s ruling and return the case back to Alabama where it belongs. MARRIAGE IS NOT A FEDERAL ISSUE - MARRIAGE IS A STATES’ ISSUE.
Regardless of what SCOTUS does or doesn’t do, its unconstitutional acts must be NULLIFIED by the states. It’s time.
How have the states become so duped that they think they have to obey the supreme ct and this govt ? This govt is lawless. If they dont obey law why should we the people ?
“Conservative religious people need to get their own act together regarding sex related matters and develop an authentic spiritual life so they are enabled to humbly and peacefully resist the evil tyranny which will follow the legalization of gay marriage.”
Probably that is what is going to eventually happen, religious groups will ignore the civil authorities and their impossible definitions of marriage, and just take whatever punishment the state imposes for disagreeing with its current definition of marriage. Probably should have happened long ago. Now a great number are simply conditioned to think the state defines marriage, so they accept whatever the state comes up with at the time as possible and legitimate. But for many the state’s take has been wrong for centuries, for many more since it came up with no-fault divorce, and now ‘gay marriage.’ To the state in the modern era all marriage has ever been is a civil contract that can be broken and resumed between any parties the state allows for.
Freegards
Dont consult the attorney. Just dont do it.
The fed govt are legislators sent from the ‘States” they are in subjection to us they have no power to enforce the tbousands of laws. We dont have to obey anything they say.
The Wallace stand against the feds is not an equivalent circumstance at all to this.
The 14A gave the feds ONE area of valid interference with the states: prohibit state-sponsored segregation. So Wallace was out of line and the feds were on solid constitutional grounds.
This is entirely different. The feds have NO constitutional authority to interfere with marriage and their unconstitutional acts and decision must be nullified by Alabama and the other states.
Either the states and the people of this great country reassert the Constitution as the Law of the Land and the ONLY standard for valid federal government action or Marxist tyranny prevails.
SCOTUS
I find this situation difficult because I see a lot of anger out there about it.
I don’t agree with gay marriage but the elites have made their decision so to speak and something more disconcerting is on my mind.
The tyranny as in prosecution and persecution of people for opposing gay marriage is becoming more and more obvious as the legalization comes into force.
LGBT activists are angry and bitter over real and imagined wrongs done to them and they want payback.
THERE IS A DEEP PROBLEM AMONG RELIGIOUSLY CONSERVATIVE PEOPLE. SOME THINK THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WILL SAVE THEM, NOT GOD. THE POLITICIANS HAVE SOLD OUT AND THE GOP WILL DO NOTHING TO STOP GAY MARRIAGE OR THE TRYANNY THAT IS COMING WITH IT.
BUT BEYOND THE POLITICS, I KEEP ON READING STORIES ABOUT WRONGDOING INVOLVING CLERGY OR LEADERS OF VARIOUS CHURCHES.
SOMETIMES ITS MONEY BUT A LOT OF TIMES ITS ABOUT SEX. THE BIBLE PREACHER OR YOUTH LEADER ASKS YOUNG GIRLS IN THE CHURCH FOR EXPLICIT (DIRTY) PICTURES. THE PASTOR IS HAVING SEX RELATIONS WITH VARIOUS PEOPLE AND SO ON.
FIGHTING WITH GAY PEOPLE ABOUT THEIR SEXUAL MISCONDUCT DISTRACTS CONSERVATIVE RELIGIOUS PEOPLE FROM DEALING WITH THEIR OWN SEXUAL MISCONDUCT WHICH WILL SOONER OR LATER CATCH UP WITH THEM.
Conservative religious people need to clean up their own backyard about sex.
Meanwhile all good Americans regardless of religion need to stand up to the un-American actions coming from courts that are on the side of tyranny and promote tyranny like their gay marriage decisions.
Federal courts are not inferior to state courts. For guidance, look at the Supremacy Clause. As for your earlier legal assertion that only the Supreme Court, not federal district or circuit courts have standing to rule on state party cases - no court has recognized that claim as having any validity and there is explicit precedent to the contrary dating back, as I cited, to at least 1861.
Yes, but only within the context of the Constitution itself, within which SCOTUS is restrained. Here, it is SCOTUS' job is not to deal with the subject of marriage which is outside their scope of power, but to rule on the constitutionality of the case. Here, it is SCOTUS' job to strike down the lower court's ruling as you say, and to rule in favor of the state, again, not based on SCOTUS' own view of marriage, but because the state, not the feds, has the power to decide in marriage issues.
SCOTUS and the federal government have no constitutional authority to act or decide anything on the subject of marriage. Marriage is a states' issue.
Well you confused me when you said “You assume that LGBT activists are fighting for some sort of “equality” in our society” when I said absolutely nothing of the sort. I was wondering if you confused me for somebody else.
I always thought that Reagan’s Kennedy would cast the deciding vote for this, but it may be that GWB’s Roberts joins in too just to show how “Republicans” care.
But the American people since ‘’Marbury v. Madison,’’ when there were six judges, have had eternal faith in the “wisdom” of the presidential appointees. I don’t think anything will change their “thinking”.
The law is clear as can be. Regardless of whether or not the federal judge is right on the underlying ruling, there's no way a State Supreme Court judge can overturn a federal judge. If Alabama tries to nullify the ruling, they will lose -- if necessary with federal marshals or a federalized National Guard.
Even use of the term “gay marriage” by conservatives is itself capitulation to the liberal dogma.
I’m afraid the American people lack the understanding of what tyranny involves, based on their primary and general election voting records for decades now.
I think that's a reasonable historical interpretation of the 14th Amendment, but not one that currently holds weight even from the most conservative justices on the Supreme Court. Whether rightly or wrongly, the Supreme Court has taken an expansive view of the power of the 14th Amendment. In the end, federal courts always trump state courts in areas where they share jurisdiction so we have to live with the federal interpretation. Don't like it? Get better judges.
Painting a negative picture of resisting gay marriage by comparison to Wallace and segregation led me to consider you a supporter of ‘marriage equality’.
Sorry for any misunderstanding.
You do seem to show up in these forums to offer contrary opinions a lot......
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.