Are the playoffs on yet?? Geesh, I am trying to dial them up on my laptop, and I am finding zero!! the City of Köln is not exactly sponsoring a block party for the NFL Playoffs, as a matter of fact, it's all I can do to find a bar owner to comprehend, "NFL Futball". It's 10:30ish PM here, and no more Kolsh biers and Jaegie for me!!
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Keith In Köln <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
No, some Moonbat with a Juris Doctorate, (the same as me) has made a point to legislate from the bench, with the little bit of authority that she has been granted.Let us make sure we are clear here.....No Court has spoken yet on this issue.(Greg Goes On To Say) :If DOMA is constitutional, then why isn't the Massachusetts law unconstitutional?=======
This is not a question of Constitutionality, this is a question of Massachusetts law being in conflict with federal law. Uhm.....I guess this is something novel? <Grin>!
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 7:32 PM, GregfromBoston <greg.vincent@yahoo.com> wrote:
DOMA is very much Constitutional.
----------------------------------------------
The courts say otherwise.
But tell you what.
On Jan 8, 11:55 am, Keith In Köln <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> DOMA is very much Constitutional, This is where folks try and redefine the
> term and concept of marriage, which is a ecclisastical function. Tom and
> most militant Gays who wish to force their lifestyle down Americans'
> proverbial throats, (Note how Tom defined and described the term "Gay"
> above, yet a few days ago was attempting to claim that the term, "Gay" had
> nothing at all to do with sexuality) want to redefine the term and concept
> of marriage, in order to force their secularist beliefs upon the American
> public.
>> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 3:27 AM, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com>wrote:
> > > >> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>>
>
>
> > Tell the president. I did
>
> > On Jan 7, 9:22 pm, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Yes, Greg.
>
> > > I believe that DOMA is indeed unconstitutuional.
>
> > > On 1/7/11, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Well Tom, you just echoed the court on why DOMA is unconstitutional.
> > > > It IS.
>
> > > > On Jan 7, 8:22 pm, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Markie Mark-
>
> > > >> Your statements are naive and you are clearly uneducated.
>
> > > >> At the time the Constitution was written in the late 18th Century,
> > "gay"
> > > >> simply meant festive, happy, or beautiful, and the term had nothing to
> > do
> > > >> with sexuality whatsoever. Since the term did not refer to
> > same-gendered
> > > >> "friendship", which was the term used for same gender relationships at
> > > >> that
> > > >> time, the term "gay" does not exist in the Constitution at all, as the
> > > >> term
> > > >> as we now use it did not exist. In fact, in the 1780's, Sex was rarely
> > > >> ever
> > > >> discussed or mentioned at all outside of close private encounters
> > between
> > > >> "friends" and couples behind closed doors. The Constitution does,
> > however,
> > > >> state in the 14th amendment that discrimination against any citizen is
> > > >> unlawful: " All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
> > > >> subject to the jurisdiction <glossary.html#JURIS> thereof, are
> > citizens of
> > > >> the United States and of the State wherein they reside.( No ) State
> > shall
> > > >> make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or
> > immunities
> > > >> of
> > > >> citizens of the United States; nor shall any State
> > > >> deprive<glossary.html#DEPRIVE>any person of life, liberty, or
> > > >> property, without due
> > > >> process <consttop_duep.html> of law; nor deny to any person within its
> > > >> jurisdiction <glossary.html#JURIS> the equal protection of the laws."
> > > >> Therefore, the current unequal second calss citizen status of gays in
> > the
> > > >> United States is unlawful, unconstitutional, and discriminatory.
>
> > > >> So there you have it, Markie. I hope that this lesson in etymology and
> > the
> > > >> Constitution enlightens you somewhat.
>
> > > >> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 10:58 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE
> > > >> <markmka...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > >> > Tommy,
>
> > > >> > Please list all rights as enumerated in the Constitution that Gays
> > > >> > (etc) do not have.
>
> > > >> > You constantly harp about "RIGHTS" .... You never list them. Just
> > what
> > > >> > are those "Rights" that you feel are absent in your life that others
> > > >> > have.
>
> > > >> > Please DO NOT list "Privileges" or "Licenses" that can only be
> > granted
> > > >> > on a State level.
>
> > > >> > ONLY "Rights" are meant to be universal... The different
> > "privileges"
> > > >> > and "licenses" that are left to the "Several States" are not now
> > nor
> > > >> > were they ever meant to be, "Rights".
>
> > > >> > Each State is in itself "Sovereign" with local rules being that
> > which
> > > >> > makes a State attractive to one and repulsive to another. (I would
> > > >> > NEVER live in Texas)
>
> > > >> > Traffic laws, Domestic violence laws, noise laws, land use laws,
> > > >> > marriage/divorce laws, and even the death penalty laws ALL vary from
> > > >> > State to State because the "Several States" have the "Right" to make
> > > >> > it so. They must bow to to will of the people in that State as long
> > as
> > > >> > it does not interfere with one of the Federally Guaranteed and
> > > >> > Constitutionally enumerated "Rights".
>
> > > >> > Just which of your Constitutionally Guaranteed and Enumerated
> > "Rights"
> > > >> > are you lacking ??
>
> > > >> > I'll wait for the list and your personal explanation for each. Then
> > we
> > > >> > can discuss it.
>
> > > >> > I am anxiously awaiting your well thought-out and accurate
> > (remember,
> > > >> > Constitutionally Enumerated "Right") list to begin an earnest
> > > >> > discussion.
>
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > >> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > >> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > > >> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > > >> Have a great day,
> > > >> Tommy- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > --
> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > > Have a great day,
> > > Tommy- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment