It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
...bringing the matter to the Supreme Court.
Originally posted by camaro68ss
whats the point of voting as a state when one person can over turn it? Unconstitutional or not im speeking in the mannor of the voice of a state vs the voice of one judge.
Originally posted by camaro68ss
whats the point of voting as a state when one person can over turn it? Unconstitutional or not im speeking in the mannor of the voice of a state vs the voice of one judge.
Originally posted by intrepid
Originally posted by camaro68ss
whats the point of voting as a state when one person can over turn it? Unconstitutional or not im speeking in the mannor of the voice of a state vs the voice of one judge.
Well this is going to go before the 9 that matter. It's not 1 person, it's the SC ruling on the Constitution. The Constitution trumps all. If I'm not wrong there are more conservatives on the SC right now than liberals. 5-4, I think but they will still make the right decision. Not like they are up for reelection. History is their legacy.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
I've always wondered what part of the constitution provides the right to marry at all.
Perhaps it is in that whole "pursuit of happiness" business. When you think about it in that way, banning gay marriage certainly seems unconstitutional.
The "sanctity of marriage" rubbish is only one thing and that is a desire to harm, by law, homosexuals
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
The judge upholding the Constitution is now a dictator? By what logic?
Originally posted by camaro68ss
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
The judge upholding the Constitution is now a dictator? By what logic?
lol im just asking questions. im not saying he is one. all im saying is is it right to turn down the voice "majority" of the people.