Hippo_Tron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-04-04 03:22 PM
Original message |
Denying gay couples equal benefits is UNCONSTITUTIONAL |
|
Excerpted from the 14th ammendment...
"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."
Homosexuals are being denied their Privileges as citizens of the United States WITHOUT due process by law. I don't give a shit if states have passed laws or constitutional amendments to ban gay people from having equal benefits, those laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
And in response to the typical freeper argument that they have the same rights as everybody else, to enter a homosexual union, that is like telling a wheelchair bound person that they have the same rights as everybody else, to walk up stairs.
|
unblock
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-04-04 03:25 PM
Response to Original message |
1. but since when did being wrong stand in the way of bigotry? |
Hippo_Tron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-04-04 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Wrong, right, it doesn't matter... it's STILL unconstitutional |
|
That should be the end of discussion with these people. Granted, they support the Patriot Act, so, unconstitutional doesn't really mean much to them.
|
knowbody0
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-04-04 03:35 PM
Response to Original message |
3. it appears that the bible |
|
horrifically interpreted by mad men is replacing our constitution.
|
Bleacher Creature
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-04-04 03:36 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Why do you think they want to amend the federal Constitution so badly? I've heard a bunch of legal scholars claim that the Supreme Court (assuming it doesn't get taken over by the wingnuts) will one day rule exactly ths way -- as it did in Loving v. Virginia (holding that bans on interracial marriage was unconstitutional). But like in Loving, they can't do it until the political climate allows it to happen.
|
youngred
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-04-04 05:43 PM
Response to Original message |
|
but for some reason PERSONAL morality matters more than our nation's POLITICAL charter. If you don't like abortions, don't have one. If you don't like marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex. That's the point we need to make.
|
nancyharris
(637 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-04-04 07:40 PM
Response to Original message |
6. The same can be said for |
Hippo_Tron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-04-04 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. Sounds good to me, I don't give a shit if a guy marries two women |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 10:45 PM
Response to Original message |