Wisconsin homosexuals just screwed themselves (Page 4): UNwhat? I know that it is ridiculous to try to get you to see the light. What SCOTUS did was to enforce equal treatment on state...

jelun

reconreb wrote:

You can twist the Constatution , but the SCOTUS can not make law , thats what is unconstantutional !

UNwhat?

I know that it is ridiculous to try to get you to see the light.
What SCOTUS did was to enforce equal treatment on state law.
The group DOES have that authority, sorry that you can't appreciate this. Did you react the same way in the 60s?
They did the exact same thing then. Wiping out discrimination at the state level v**ed on by the majority in one form or another is EXACTLY what they are meant to do.
Thank God.

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

jelun wrote:

UNwhat?

I know that it is ridiculous to try to get you to see the light.
The group DOES have that authority, sorry that you can't appreciate this. Did you react the same way in the 60s?
They did the exact same thing then. Wiping out discrimination at the state level v**ed on by the majority in one form or another is EXACTLY what they are meant to do.
Thank God.

THE hell you say, you probably misspoke
(What SCOTUS did was to enforce equal treatment on state law) Question - does SCOTUS enforce law now ?
Perhaps I'm unaware .Look we all make opinions for ourselves as to what laws to follow no matter what SCOTUS opinion may be , for example there are plenty of laws that deal with sodomy as a crime yet you probably disagree and perhaps participate .

jelun

reconreb wrote:

THE hell you say, you probably misspoke
(What SCOTUS did was to enforce equal treatment on state law) Question - does SCOTUS enforce law now ?
Perhaps I'm unaware .Look we all make opinions for ourselves as to what laws to follow no matter what SCOTUS opinion may be , for example there are plenty of laws that deal with sodomy as a crime yet you probably disagree and perhaps participate .

Nah, you are just stupid.

Web Results
en·force
/inˈfôrs/
verb
compel observance of or compliance with (a law, rule, or obligation).
synonyms: impose, apply, administer, implement, bring to bear...

There are no laws being enforced (there's that word again) about sodomy. Not since this ruling...http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/scotus-lawrence-v-texas-texas-sodomy-law.173365362/

You REALLY should try to keep up. And quite frankly, it is none of your business what form my sex life takes.

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

jelun wrote:

UNwhat?

I know that it is ridiculous to try to get you to see the light.
What SCOTUS did was to enforce equal treatment on state law.
The group DOES have that authority, sorry that you can't appreciate this. Did you react the same way in the 60s?
They did the exact same thing then. Wiping out discrimination at the state level v**ed on by the majority in one form or another is EXACTLY what they are meant to do.
Thank God.

SCOTUS can interpret the Constitution, not write or rewrite a law. If they determine a law to be unconstitutional, Congress must rewrite it, in the mean time the law is nullified, and previous laws are back in place, but they have NOT written a law, only declared the one in question to be unconstitutional PERIOD. In this case they had to refine "marriage" and also "forget" that the constitution does not allow the FEDERAL government to have anything to do with marriage, which is a state or local question.

jelun

no propaganda please wrote:

SCOTUS can interpret the Constitution, not write o... (show quote)

How does it feel to be so effing stupid?

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

jelun wrote:

How does it feel to be so effing stupid?

:lol:

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

no propaganda please wrote:

SCOTUS can interpret the Constitution, not write o... (show quote)

thanks , why is that so hard for others to understand, it is in simple and plain language :thumbup:

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

reconreb wrote:

thanks , why is that so hard for others to understand, it is in simple and plain language :thumbup:

Apparently it is very complicated as Jelun just called me fu**king stupid for this comment. Personally, considering the source, I consider that a compliment.

hprinze Loc: Central Florida

reconreb wrote:

thanks , why is that so hard for others to understand, it is in simple and plain language :thumbup:

===============================

And why is it so difficult for the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government to understand.

Oh, I see. It is is because they do understand but they are criminals and they do what they want to do, regardless of legality.

Chameleon12

jelun wrote:

I am not wrong. Look up protected groups of people. Caucasian is not there it doesn't need to be there.

No' I'm right there are several black colleges here in the US that you can get a "minority" scholarship for as a caucasian. Now, why do you think that a black college would offer a "minority" scholarship to a caucasian? Because, as a caucasian, in a black majority college, you will most likely have to forego certain opportunities afforded to the majority. 1. It's very unlikely you will be elected onto the student council. 2. It is unlikely you will become president of any academic club 3. Becoming a pledge for a sorority or fraternity will likely be harder. In 19 states in the US caucasians are a minority. Read here: http://madamenoire.com/527005/in-19-states-w****s-have-become-the-minority/
The constitution gives everyone equal status. This includes w****s

Kevyn

dwallace2015 wrote:

It must be the fungus in all that cheese. Goes right to the position the brain should occupy, or in lieu of that straight to their ass.

You hit the nail on the head, those i***ts elected Scott Walker to be their governor!

Chameleon12

jelun wrote:

Remember that old saying that goes something like: If it seems to good to be true it most likely isn't.?
That would be the case with this story that you wanted to find so badly to prove your point.
One good tip off is that if instead of having an actual publication date for a story the story is headed "Six Months Ago" there is some problem with your source.
The link takes you to http://tribuneherald.net/about/

Apparently, the article was archived. Here's another reference to the article:
http://www.inquisitr.com/1979548/ku-klux-klan-forces-black-baker-to-make-r****t-kkk-cake-so-does-memories-pizza-lose-religious-freedom/

Chameleon12

Bad Bob wrote:

Some people are just plain stupid.

KKK Wins Lawsuit Against Bakery for Discrimination - Snopes

www.snopes.com Home Media Not Necessarily the News

Snopes.com

Apr 14, 2015 - Origins: On 23 August 2013, the satirical Tribune Herald web site published a f**e news article titled "KKK Wins Lawsuit Against Bakery for ...

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, Bad Bob, but, Snopes is the left's version of Breitbart. They're both full of biased bull.

Chameleon12

Bad Bob wrote:

The new Reflublicans sure keep Snopes busy.

Bad Bob, Jelun, do a little research on this article, and then tell me how honest Snopes really is:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2307857/posts
It should be obvious to all but the most liberal person that Snopes is incredibly biased and full of spin but, just to make my point, I would like you to find a single Snopes article disproving a single false liberal claim, article, rumor, etc. Politifact and even fact check points out both liberal and conservative lies. Where is Snopes liberal lies? And don't tell me liberals never lie. I'm a moderate. I see both sides, and they're both full of crap.

jelun

Chameleon12 wrote:

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, Bad Bob, but, Snopes is the left's version of Breitbart. They're both full of biased bull.

We are aware, naturally, that reich wing nuts like to put forward that Snopes is a politically motivated site. There is no basis for that statement, but, since when have righties needed facts?