Rattigan, the 14th Amendment in its literal reading would support the rights of women voting but, since the Supreme Court did not acknowledge that, a separate amendment was enacted to circumvent their decision. They basically ran around the judges knowing they would not have made the proper decision.
Another Kim Davis inspired self-invented "gay issue"
by Simon 46 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
GrreatTeacher
Ratigan, why do you think the Supreme Court has an odd number of justices?
( The answer is: so they never have an evenly divided court. )
I don't understand why you have such an issue with a "divided" court. Why is the existence of 5-4 decisions so disturbing to you?
And I think it's pretty obvious how this situation gets "checked" and by which branch of government.
(It's the Executive branch's job to appoint judges. )
-
Rattigan350
Village idiot "Rattigan just for argument's sake, would you support a separate amendment dealing exclusively with gay rights? How about an amendment that specifies marriage as a right for all sexual orientations?"
Whether I would support it or not is not relevant, however, I believe that is the proper way to handle the matter for the whole country, rather than pull a rabbit out of the Constitution's butt. There were states that made it legal and states that made it illegal. If my state made it legal by law or constitution, I would be fine with that.
The Supreme Court gets things wrong such as upholding Obamacare.
Mostly the cases we hear of from the Supreme Court are criminal issues such a Roe V Wade. I support appellate courts declaring laws unconstitutional when someone is sitting in jail unjustly.
-
Rattigan350
Lisarose said "Possibly women could have been given the right to vote the same way, but the fact is they didn't, for whatever reason. My guess would be that either the constitution was written in a way that did not allow them to interpret it to allow women to vote, or there wasn't the will on the part of the court to do so at that time."
The Supreme Court in Minor in 1875 ruled 9-0 against women voting because that is the result they wanted, not because the constitution stated that.
The Supreme Court in Obergefell in 2015 ruled 5-4 for SS marriage because that is the result they wanted, not because the constitution stated that. It just prevented them from seeking a constitutional amendment.
"Since you do not like the way the court interpreted the law". That is exactly my point. I don't like the way they interpreted, not the result. I don't care about the result. I don't like gay pride anymore than I like religious fundamentalism, both are nuts.
Since the retirement of Sandra Day O'Connor, Kennedy has been the swing vote on many of the Court's 5–4 decisions. He has authored the majority ruling in many of these cases, including Lawrence v. Texas, Boumediene v. Bush, Citizens United v. FEC, and Obergefell v. Hodges.
Kennedy has reliably issued conservative rulings during most of his tenure, having voted with William Rehnquist as often as any other justice from 1992 to the end of the Rehnquist Court in 2005. In his first term on the court, Kennedy voted with Rehnquist 92 percent of the time—more than any other justice.
After 2005, when Sandra Day O'Connor, who had previously been known as the court's "swing vote", retired, Kennedy began to receive the title for himself. Kennedy is more conservative than former Justice O'Connor was on issues of race, religion, and abortion, and intensely dislikes being labeled a "swing vote".
On the Roberts Court, Kennedy often decides the outcome of a case. In the 2008–2009 term, he was in the majority 92 percent of the time. In the 23 decisions in which the justices split 5-to-4, Kennedy was in the majority in all but five. Of those 23 decisions, 16 were strictly along ideological lines, and Kennedy joined the conservative wing of the court 11 times; the liberals, 5.
In the 2010–2011 term, 16 cases were decided by a 5–4 vote, and Kennedy joined the majority in 14 of the decisions.
-
GrreatTeacher
And again, so what?
It's as if you are miffed that civics and governance are political.
Umm, that's how it works.
Maybe you are actually upset that the US is extremely polarized poltically right now? I know I am.
But, that's a totally different conversation.
-
Rattigan350
Things that make you go hmmm.
Anthony Kennedy looks alot like Anthony Morris III.
But back to the subject of gay pride.
The best gay people are the ones that you have to be told that they are and can't tell without being told.
But to the ones who say I don't understand the law and constitution. I currently have a case pending in my state's court of appeals, that I did myself. They can do what they want and it can go either way but I'm pretty certain that I have an 87.3% chance of winning because I feel that my citations to the law and case law and use of them in argument is that good.
-
GrreatTeacher
Let us know the verdict. -
Village Idiot
Rattigan350:
"The best gay people are the ones that you have to be told that they are and can't tell without being told."
Children should be seen and not heard?
-
Viviane
Whether I would support it or not is not relevant, however, I believe that is the proper way to handle the matter for the whole country, rather than pull a rabbit out of the Constitution's butt.
Sorry, I struggle to concern myself with someone who's argument boils down to "can't make a complete sentence".
-
Viviane
But to the ones who say I don't understand the law and constitution. I currently have a case pending in my state's court of appeals, that I did myself. They can do what they want and it can go either way but I'm pretty certain that I have an 87.3% chance of winning because I feel that my citations to the law and case law and use of them in argument is that good.
Or who's argument is "don't understand math, arithmetic, or the difference".