(04-28-2015 04:07 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 03:56 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  I hope it's legalized nationwide so the liberal talking heads will shut the **** up about it and their alligator tears can stop a-flowin'.

I would tend to agree, if there was any chance in hell of that actually happening. They'll legalize it, and not much of anything will change for about 99.2% of people.

BUT, the professional gay lobby and their enforcement arm in the gaystapo will simply move on to their next "grievance", in their never ending quest/demand that gay be normalized. That it sit right there next to hetero as a perfectly normal condition and everything that is associated with it.

Now, I don't claim to know what that next demand will be, maybe the elimination of sex specific restrooms or something. Who knows, but something will need to fill that void and keep the rabblers trying to force this crap down our throats front and center.

Protection from discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, and contracting for the entire LGBT community is rising to the forefront. The same protections provided to evangelicals based upon their religious beliefs should be provided to Transgendered individuals. No more, no less. If you cannot fire someone for being evangelical, you shouldn't be able to do so for being Transgendered. If you cannot fire an evangelical for wearing clothing appropriate to their religion, you cannot fire a Transgendered person for wearing clothing appropriate to their gender.

I don't think anyone is clamoring for an end to sex specific restrooms but rather a guarantee that Transgendered persons have access to the restroom that they 'present' as without harassment.

(04-28-2015 04:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:07 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 03:56 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  I hope it's legalized nationwide so the liberal talking heads will shut the **** up about it and their alligator tears can stop a-flowin'.

I would tend to agree, if there was any chance in hell of that actually happening. They'll legalize it, and not much of anything will change for about 99.2% of people.

BUT, the professional gay lobby and their enforcement arm in the gaystapo will simply move on to their next "grievance", in their never ending quest/demand that gay be normalized. That it sit right there next to hetero as a perfectly normal condition and everything that is associated with it.

Now, I don't claim to know what that next demand will be, maybe the elimination of sex specific restrooms or something. Who knows, but something will need to fill that void and keep the rabblers trying to force this crap down our throats front and center.

Protection from discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, and contracting for the entire LGBT community is rising to the forefront. The same protections provided to evangelicals based upon their religious beliefs should be provided to Transgendered individuals. No more, no less. If you cannot fire someone for being evangelical, you shouldn't be able to do so for being Transgendered. If you cannot fire an evangelical for wearing clothing appropriate to their religion, you cannot fire a Transgendered person for wearing clothing appropriate to their gender.

I don't think anyone is clamoring for an end to sex specific restrooms but rather a guarantee that Transgendered persons have access to the restroom that they 'present' as without harassment.

That's going to be a sticking point in the future I feel.

(04-28-2015 04:18 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:07 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 03:56 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  I hope it's legalized nationwide so the liberal talking heads will shut the **** up about it and their alligator tears can stop a-flowin'.

I would tend to agree, if there was any chance in hell of that actually happening. They'll legalize it, and not much of anything will change for about 99.2% of people.

BUT, the professional gay lobby and their enforcement arm in the gaystapo will simply move on to their next "grievance", in their never ending quest/demand that gay be normalized. That it sit right there next to hetero as a perfectly normal condition and everything that is associated with it.

Now, I don't claim to know what that next demand will be, maybe the elimination of sex specific restrooms or something. Who knows, but something will need to fill that void and keep the rabblers trying to force this crap down our throats front and center.

Protection from discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, and contracting for the entire LGBT community is rising to the forefront. The same protections provided to evangelicals based upon their religious beliefs should be provided to Transgendered individuals. No more, no less. If you cannot fire someone for being evangelical, you shouldn't be able to do so for being Transgendered. If you cannot fire an evangelical for wearing clothing appropriate to their religion, you cannot fire a Transgendered person for wearing clothing appropriate to their gender.

I don't think anyone is clamoring for an end to sex specific restrooms but rather a guarantee that Transgendered persons have access to the restroom that they 'present' as without harassment.

That's going to be a sticking point in the future I feel.

It will be...for some, its all about hating on someone and making their lives needlessly difficult. I think Trans will be the new Pink of the new Brown of the new Black of the new Red.

(04-28-2015 04:22 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:18 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:07 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 03:56 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  I hope it's legalized nationwide so the liberal talking heads will shut the **** up about it and their alligator tears can stop a-flowin'.

I would tend to agree, if there was any chance in hell of that actually happening. They'll legalize it, and not much of anything will change for about 99.2% of people.

BUT, the professional gay lobby and their enforcement arm in the gaystapo will simply move on to their next "grievance", in their never ending quest/demand that gay be normalized. That it sit right there next to hetero as a perfectly normal condition and everything that is associated with it.

Now, I don't claim to know what that next demand will be, maybe the elimination of sex specific restrooms or something. Who knows, but something will need to fill that void and keep the rabblers trying to force this crap down our throats front and center.

Protection from discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, and contracting for the entire LGBT community is rising to the forefront. The same protections provided to evangelicals based upon their religious beliefs should be provided to Transgendered individuals. No more, no less. If you cannot fire someone for being evangelical, you shouldn't be able to do so for being Transgendered. If you cannot fire an evangelical for wearing clothing appropriate to their religion, you cannot fire a Transgendered person for wearing clothing appropriate to their gender.

I don't think anyone is clamoring for an end to sex specific restrooms but rather a guarantee that Transgendered persons have access to the restroom that they 'present' as without harassment.

That's going to be a sticking point in the future I feel.

It will be...for some, its all about hating on someone and making their lives needlessly difficult. I think Trans will be the new Pink of the new Brown of the new Black of the new Red.

Good grief. The "what bathroom should be used" issue is not about hating on transgendered or making their lives needlessly difficult.

Where do their rights to use a bathroom that makes them feel comfortable end and my right to use a public bathroom and also be comfortable begin? The rights of one should not supercede or impair the rights of another.

If a transgender guy who IDs as a woman wants to use the ladies room, how an I supposed to know he's just a transgender and not a wackjob trying to creep out or peep at women?

Same with the men's room, is a guy at a urinal comfortable with a transgender woman who views herself as a man, standing next to him in the men's room or even walking through to a stall?

Maybe the solution is unisex or transgender bathrooms in addition to traditional men's and women's restrooms? I don't have an answer but everyone's rights to use a public bathroom and be comfortable have to be considered not just the rights of the transgendered.

(04-28-2015 04:09 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Tell me why again that our government feels the need to define the covenant between two adults, regardless of their sex?

Why stop at two adults? I'm looking forward to adding more wives. We can even reproduce without medical assistance and the willingness of a surrogate.

(04-28-2015 01:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Oral arguments are meaningless.

Agreed. Kennedy is well-known for hammering both sides in oral arguments, especially in cases where he knows that he's the deciding vote. You'll also often see justices ask questions that are contrary to his/her personal opinion in order to essentially control the other side's arguments and prompt certain responses. (Scalia is notorious for doing this, where he'll actually start asking all of the questions that a liberal would to whoever is representing the conservative position, which has the effect of actually giving the conservative a more friendly audience to answer to.)

Regardless, Kennedy's prior written opinions are really what matter and it's tough to see how he could possibly rule against gay marriage with what we've seen in the previous cases.

Let the states decide. That's what they should have done with abortion.

(04-28-2015 05:17 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Let the states decide. That's what they should have done with abortion.

Full faith and credit makes that impossible to enforce.

(04-28-2015 05:17 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Let the states decide. That's what they should have done with abortion.

That ship has sailed. Perhaps defusing issues by compromising with liberals before issues get so far away from the Conservatives that they end up not just losing, but losing everything, might be something the Conservatives might consider.

(04-28-2015 05:21 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 05:17 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Let the states decide. That's what they should have done with abortion.

Full faith and credit makes that impossible to enforce.

Explain why you believe the full faith and credit clause makes this impossible to enforce?

Roberts:

"Your not seeking to join the institution, you're seeking to change what the institution is."

(04-28-2015 05:27 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 05:21 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 05:17 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Let the states decide. That's what they should have done with abortion.

Full faith and credit makes that impossible to enforce.

Explain why you believe the full faith and credit clause makes this impossible to enforce?

Because bigots in states like Texas and Alabama are showing that they're not even going to bother enabling full faith and credit.

(04-28-2015 04:03 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 01:54 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  I think the SCOTUS might surprise everyone. This is clearly a state issue.

So long as Full faith and credit is in the Constitution, the SCOTUS' hands are tied.

By the way, a ruling in favor of creating 'free' and 'not free' states would cause unprecedented strife and chaos.

And it would be an utter and complete disaster for the GOP. The backlash against the GOP would be huge (I'm thinking protests on an unprecedented scale in American history), it would be broad, and it would impact them severely.

You do not understand the full faith and credit clause. For instance, I live in Tennessee. The Tennessee constitution says that I can not be taxed on my income. If I move to California, full faith and credit doesnt prevent California from taxing my income.

There is also history, where full faith and credit was not used to force states which did not allow mixed race couples to marry to be forced to recognized mixed-race marriages from states where it was legal.

There is also recent history showing that courts now won't buy that reasoning.

Gets old hearing bigots call others bigots.

(04-28-2015 05:43 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  There is also recent history showing that courts now won't buy that reasoning.

Which courts? The 9th circuit?

(04-28-2015 05:46 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 05:43 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  There is also recent history showing that courts now won't buy that reasoning.

Which courts? The 9th circuit?

One circuit.

Guys, do you guys have a problem with California or New York saying..."we will only recognize marriages conducted in states where same sex marriages are legal"?

Have a marriage license from Tennessee? Die a New York resident. No Social Security benefits for you. No estate tax exemption. No adoption recognition for stepparents. None of that.

Full faith and credit guys.

Any chance NY would not recognize a, you know, REAL marriage?

(04-28-2015 06:03 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Any chance NY would not recognize a, you know, REAL marriage?

What a beautifully unamerican sentiment. I GOT MINE.

(04-28-2015 04:22 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:18 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:07 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 03:56 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  I hope it's legalized nationwide so the liberal talking heads will shut the **** up about it and their alligator tears can stop a-flowin'.

I would tend to agree, if there was any chance in hell of that actually happening. They'll legalize it, and not much of anything will change for about 99.2% of people.

BUT, the professional gay lobby and their enforcement arm in the gaystapo will simply move on to their next "grievance", in their never ending quest/demand that gay be normalized. That it sit right there next to hetero as a perfectly normal condition and everything that is associated with it.

Now, I don't claim to know what that next demand will be, maybe the elimination of sex specific restrooms or something. Who knows, but something will need to fill that void and keep the rabblers trying to force this crap down our throats front and center.

Protection from discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, and contracting for the entire LGBT community is rising to the forefront. The same protections provided to evangelicals based upon their religious beliefs should be provided to Transgendered individuals. No more, no less. If you cannot fire someone for being evangelical, you shouldn't be able to do so for being Transgendered. If you cannot fire an evangelical for wearing clothing appropriate to their religion, you cannot fire a Transgendered person for wearing clothing appropriate to their gender.

I don't think anyone is clamoring for an end to sex specific restrooms but rather a guarantee that Transgendered persons have access to the restroom that they 'present' as without harassment.

That's going to be a sticking point in the future I feel.

It will be...for some, its all about hating on someone and making their lives needlessly difficult. I think Trans will be the new Pink of the new Brown of the new Black of the new Red.

And there you go. Easiest prediction of 2015 without a doubt. lol.