MARRIAGE EQUALITY NATIONWIDE

[Ace]

So your argument is that the Supreme Court overstepped its limits?  That it misinterpreted the Constitution?  Read the 14th Amendment.

I was not trying to say anything about the ruling. I was only replying to Cato statement about the 9th amendment and how it comes into play with the 10th amendment in regards to marriage. Which he/she was talking about.  

Now your question:

Did the court over set its bounds? hell yes

Why are you opposed to gay marriage?  It is not so much marriage itself that I oppose. It is the fact that to democracy was taken way from the people. The people of the state's (better or for worse) had voted on the issue as they have a legal right to do so.

What is the down side to this? Is because if you take the peoples right to vote away from them on one issue what other issue will be denied for them to deiced on? Who is to say what the people can and cannot vote on? When do we start silencing the vote and when do we let it speak?

Because if any thing history has show is that if it was allowed to be done one time, it will been done again, and again, and ageing. Till when? when the people have no say? When we are no longer a democracy?

"The history of liberty is a history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of limitations of governmental power, not the increase of it." - Woodrow Wilson , 1912


'Empathy' is the latest code word for liberal activism, for treating the Constitution as malleable clay to be kneaded and molded in whatever form justices want. It represents an expansive view of the judiciary in which courts create policy that couldn't pass the legislative branch or, if it did, would generate voter backlash. -Karl Rove