Dave Loc: Upstate New York

As a conservative I find myself in the rare position of agreeing with liberals. Wh**ever else we may think, it is now federal law that gays have the right to marry - and as the federal law takes precedence over local law, not granting marriage license for gays violates federal law.

Too bad, however, that liberals cannot be consistent on this issue like so many others. They are clear in condemning this violation of federal law while cheering on even more egregious violation with sanctuary cities and legalized pot.

I will call for the jailing of government officials who continue to ignore federal laws involving gay marriage when I see just a few prominent liberals call for the jailing of governors, mayors and other city and state officials who also violate federal law

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

Excellent compromise but don't hold your breath.

PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco

In theory, Dave, I would agree with you that Federal laws should be equally enforced.

However I think it is not quite a fair comparison to put marriage e******y and marijuana on the the same standing, though their legality in state/federal law took a somewhat similar if reversed path.

Federal laws regarding marijuana didn't appear until 1937. Before that state laws had left it legal until state-by-state local laws made it illegal. Now we are seeing the reverse strategy whereby states are making it legal again, and the Federal government, realizing the war on marijuana is a futile and wasteful use of money, has generally opted to step away from enforcement and prosecution.

Marriage e******y however, has never been on any state's books as far as I know, and the process by which it wound its way through to SCOTUS is a reflection of its critical relationship to e******y as laid out in The Constitution.

It will be interesting to see how and when Congress passes Federal laws regarding pot. In the meantime, I am glad I live in California!
:twisted: :roll: :lol:

PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco

Looks like the people of Alabama are tired of Roy Moore's shenanigans as well.

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

Are you saying that AL.com speaks for the people of Alabama?

If so, perhaps you should know that AL.com isn't from Alabama.

It is owned by Advanced Publications which is located in New York/New Jersey.

PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco

Good point Docadhoc. I should not have inferred that the people of Alabama had spoken through AL.com.

And, like much of our media today, AL.com indeed is not locally owned. But it is locally run through the subsidiary Alabama Media Group, with its president, Tom Bates, living in the Birmingham area.

Regardless, I believe there are many in Alabama who agree with the sentiments of this quote from AL.com.

One has to admit that Roy Moore seems to be part of a long tradition of independent non-thinkers of Alabama, stretching back to George Wallace and beyond. He may be part of the last stronghold of radical conservatism, but it looks like his time in the spotlight may be short-lived.

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

You and I will never agree on the concept of "marriage" pertaining to anything other than one man and one woman, but as long as it is the law, then Alabama has to abide by it. I can hardly wait until the next hurdle is presented. Using the same "logic" a threesome must also be considered a "marriage". Should be interesting. As I understand it, a case in New York City may be up shortly of a man wanting to marry his daughter, who he hasn't seen since she was a child. He is now sterile so that barrier is not there. Should be interesting. On the other hand, with the Muslims and their law of many wives one husband, that will be the next one up. After all they came into the country as a man and his four wives. What right do we have to say that he cannot love all four? If we survive the jihad, we will only be stuck with the cultural jihad. What could possibly go wrong.

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

I'm not much of a Moore fan, but I recently moved from Alabama after living there 13 years. I can tell you, as I am an eye witness who lived smong them for more than a decade, that the huge majority of Albamians agree with and support him. Alabama in in the middle of the Bible belt and same sex marriage there is considered a sin against God.

As is the case far too often, media distorts their news to give a false picture of things, probably doing so to attempt to create a face of authority. At least I believe that's why they do it. Just about everything that is done today is done for gain for someone.

I personally know an Alabama Probate Judge who has told me that there isbiverwhelming support for Moore invites matter. Morning among overwhelming support by the average citizen there for him regarding this issue, and nearly unanimous support among judges.

Nearly everyone there attends church regularily there and to not openly support him would be considered to be disrespecting God's word.

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

Marriage being a union between a man and a woman has bern on the books in Alabama for some time. It is under that law that Chief Justice Moore has instructed to not issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. It will go to the Alabama Supreme Court for them to decide if federal law trumps state law. It will be interesting. Alabama is a test case against federal law and it will be used to determine just how far the federal gov. can go regarding ordering a state to comply with anything againt state law.

We are talking Alabama, so I'm not sure what the state S. C.. will rule. I believe it will go to the U.S. S. C. for them to decide where state law is superceeded by federal, or visa versa. I also believe thentiming is such that it will not go to the SCOTUS until after the 2016 e******n.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

In other words, your position is that if you like the federal law it should be enforced but if you don't it shouldn't. I understand that - but I do long for the days where we were a country of laws, not of the opinions of one group over another.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

There are citizens calling for Obama's impeachment too - because some call does not mean "the people" call. Remember that the laws of Alabama, like those of Kentucky, were passed by the representatives of the people.

TrueAmerican

Dave I agree federal laws should be followed, but the SCOTUS does not make law, Congress does. SCOTUS rulings are not law they are interpretations of law.

PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco

Yes Dave, I am pretty much like everyone. There are laws I like and want to be enforced and those I do not. But, at least in some cases, I and many fellow Americans are very unlike Roy Moore and Kim Davis.
I really don't like my tax dollars supporting war, at least not in the way it is being waged these days. But I pay my taxes anyway because it is the law. I really don't like that my tax burden is higher because of some tax-exempt institutions that actively campaign against both my cilvil rights and my humanity. But I don't work to end the tax-exempt status of churches.

The price of entry into a Democracy includes acceptance of some laws that do not perfectly align with one's beliefs. I think that's a small price to pay for the benefits of our system, and I'm grateful we all have a process by which to change the laws we do not feel are just. Usually, just ignoring them is not the best way to change them.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

The price of f*****m is to accept that only laws those in poser like at any given time are the laws that should be enforced - and the supporters of f*****m are those who find that acceptable.

I am agnostic on a******n, on gay marriage, on pot smoking and not all that concerned about immigration - but do consider that our liberty depends on all being held accountable to the law - guess I'm just too much of a libertarian

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

SCOTUS rulings direct how law is enforced and/or implemented.