Republican Governors Refuse To Abide By SCOTUS Decision

Several Republican Governors are now refusing to abide by a recent ruling on gay marriage in their states by continuing to refuse to allow same-sex marriages to take place.

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovemen...x_marriage_despite_supreme_court_announcement

I guess the governors feel they are above the law. Not such a good thing to be doing so close to election day.

 

Or, maybe the courts are outside the law.

 

That's an inaccurate spin.

These Governors are not required to hasten the lifting of the ban because the courts in their states will eventually be tasked to do so themselves.

You're just parroting the slander that some crapfest leftists blog invented.

I don't understand how lefties can be so concerned with the law when it comes to Republicans (even the point of fabrication) and then be some completely ignorant and dismissive of it when it comes to Democrats.

 

Since the majority of folks still see homosexuality as immoral the Governors are just abiding by the will of the people. Why should the Governors condone perverted behavior just because a handful of judges do?

 

Don't we know it brother. Will of the people. . .
[video=youtube;YgbNc-9Di7k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgbNc-9Di7k[/video]


You a Wallace supporter aintcha

 

Since when is gay a skin color?

 

Since when is the will of the people not the will of the people? Was Wallace doing the right thing because it was the will of the people?

 

Perhaps you believe Hitler was doing the right thing too? After all he was the ruling authority. Comparing apples to golf clubs does not prove your point. In one instance it was based on race in the other it is based on behavior.

 

Recent source please? All I could find was this:




Political activism indeed...

 

Those are your words not mine. Not to hard to see that the only reason you believe the Governor abide by the will of the people is because YOU see homosexuality as immoral, just as the majority once believe Negros should be segregated from white. It is not apples and oranges, you want it to be of course, but it simply isn't.

 

I actually want to write a political thesis on this, based on the very recent debates on social liberty for individuals, and the States in which they reside. I'd argue that the Civil Rights movement actually curtailed Relations, or swept it under the rug.

The real undying issues between Whites/Blacks largely ignored. The same is true of Feminism, the self-sabotage of Western Civilization under a patriarchy myth. That 'movement' created now great differences between men/women.

Dreamers and their sob stories, while we have millions of poor/homeless Americans.

The reality is that the Court has a CRAPPY record, dating back to being FDR's cronies for Social Rulings.

 

Here in ultra-conservative Idaho, it won't make a difference on election day. They'll re-elect Butch Otter merely because he has the "R" behind his name. The sad thing is, the state will probably try to fight this thing. We are last or near last in the country in so many metrics including average wage and education spending, yet these idiots will probably end up wasting millions to fight something they will most certainly lose. But that's the way conservatives roll these days. Short-sighted, narrow-minded, exclusive.

 

That is all your opinion. But since you live in a world where apples are the same as oranges it isn't surprising. Those who support gays need to hitch their beliefs to the civil rights movement because otherwise it doesn't work. There just isn't enough factual ground to stand on. Sad.

 

Those handful are federal judges. That's the way our government is structured. It's not a democracy, especially when it comes to civil rights. American Government 101. You should retake the class.

- - - Updated - - -

That's a 'yes' on being a Wallace kind-of-guy, isn't it? All that good feelin' states' rights stuff, huh?

- - - Updated - - -

Speaking of golf clubs to apples, diversionary Godwin alert.

 

And yet we can interchange the arguments used against racial integration and homosexuality and no one can tell which is which. Yes, they are so vastly different that we can recycle the rhetoric.

Civil rights and women's right are used as examples to show the complete failure in history in which your arguments lie. Which is why you must keep telling yourself 'no no, it is completely different'.

 

Again, since when is gay a skin color? With blacks they were discriminated against because of their race. Gays just want to justify their behavior....see the difference?

 

I guess you can't get over how the majority see homosexual behavior as immoral. Oh well, if there was a legitimate argument for "gay behavior" then there would be no need to keep jumping on the legitimate civil rights band wagon.

 

I don't hate gays but I do think their lifestyle is silly. People of the same sex having a relationship is like a person having a relationship with a lamp. Hey, different people have different turn ons. I really don't care what people do in private but I am not so sure society should view gays as anywhere near mainstream.Until they can rely on anything other than faux logic to support their position there is no reason to see homosexuality as anything other than a behavior.

 

....Uh....pretty sure it does not work that way.

 

The Federal Courts disagree several clearly decided the issue for Gay Marriage, that should be enough for everyone to accept. May I ask if a Gay soldier is good enough to defend you and the nation is it right this same person can't marry the person they love and be treated equally like any other couple nationally? Is their blood that may be shed less worthy?

 

Is this really that surprising.

Of course hey will hold off as long as possible.

But the outcome is assured. Gay marriage will be legalized in all fidty states before the end of the decade.

The bigots can whine and cry their little hearts out but that won't change,

 

Obama does it all the time.

 

Gender is a trait people have no control over. If a same-sex couple are denied marriage, they are denied because of traits they have absolutely no control over - gender has already been ruled a protected class, and sexual orientation is a distinction based upon gender.

 

Mod edit Off topic,,flounder

- - - Updated - - -

A child molester can defend this country but I don't have to condone the molesting part. Your appeal to authority fallacy is played. Try again.

 

Yes. Because "separate and equal" wasn't equal at all, thereby infringing on the rights of a minority. Gay marriage is no different - the only coercion involved is by those who would deny a group of people the full benefits of society and its laws.