1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, Jun 26, 2015.

  1. schiezainc

    schiezainc Well-Known Member

    I just can't get over how laughable this whole thing is. People who are vigorously arguing about protecting the integrity of the Constitution are seriously ignoring the god damn document they're allegedly trying to protect. It's unbelievable to me. Seriously unbelievable.
    If you believe in the constitution, you are required to believe the Supreme Court is the law of the land. There is NO room to debate this. It is CLEARLY spelled out.
     
  2. BDC99

    BDC99 Well-Known Member

    But they GOT IT WRONG!!!!!!!
     
  3. Smallpotatoes

    Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

  4. schiezainc

    schiezainc Well-Known Member

  5. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Can you be held in contempt of the Supreme Court? I'm just asking ... Do they have marshals, etc., at their disposal?
     
  6. schiezainc

    schiezainc Well-Known Member

    The amazing thing to me is, let's say for a minute the Supreme Court ruled Friday that marriage is absolutely "between one man and one woman" and cited some BS about marriage being about reproduction, blah blah blah.
    Those of us here who possess more than a single digit IQ know damn well that the people most loudly decrying the Supreme Court's "judicial activism" would be the first ones demanding everyone respect the court's decision because the court is the rule maker.
    Funny how winning or losing has a lot to do with how the right views the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. "The court's law is applicable when I agree with them, not when I don't."
    It's really laughable.
     
    Smallpotatoes likes this.
  7. Smallpotatoes

    Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

    You don't get to ignore the rulings you don't like. That's not the way it works.
     
  8. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Yes, it would, and I would have no problem with that.

    And yes, privileging is a word.
     
  9. TheSportsPredictor

    TheSportsPredictor Well-Known Member

    But what they're really mad about is someone yelling, "SCOREBOARD!!"
     
    Double Down likes this.
  10. schiezainc

    schiezainc Well-Known Member

    Well then they shouldn't take such hard-line stances on social issues that will eventually be overturned by the highest court in our country huh?
     
  11. Mr. Sunshine

    Mr. Sunshine Well-Known Member

    Been in a coma? This is politics.
     
    schiezainc likes this.
  12. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    At the risk of running afoul of 93Devil's "Simple Words" police, I'll just say vide supra re: my characterization of the Supremes' recent on-base-percentage ...
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page