Started By
Message

re: So, let's revisit that "literal text" approach to deciding cases, shall we?

Posted on 7/28/14 at 5:39 pm to
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123769 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 5:39 pm to
quote:

Is there a point you'd like to make?
Made it.

You don't follow?
Posted by Vols&Shaft83
Throbbing Member
Member since Dec 2012
69891 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 5:45 pm to
quote:

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 any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.



Where does it mention "marriage" in the 14th Amendment?

Posted by pistolpete23
In the present
Member since Dec 2007
7122 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 5:46 pm to
quote:

That Hook gif is pretty awesome.


There's lots of good ones here LINK
Posted by goatmilker
Castle Anthrax
Member since Feb 2009
64132 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 5:50 pm to
quote:

I am flattered.


Not a compliment.
Posted by constant cough
Lafayette
Member since Jun 2007
44788 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 5:55 pm to
Rex;dr


Voted down!


Posted by fleaux
section 0
Member since Aug 2012
8741 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 5:57 pm to
I think Rex is trying to say that the "equal protection " has something to do with it. Problem is it says "under law", and if same sex marriage isn't legal somewhere then it doesn't mean anything
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
421245 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 5:59 pm to
quote:

is being used to support the theory that Congress intended subsidies to taxpayers within State-created exchanges, only.

at the time of drafting wasn't there was only one type of exchange planned (via state-created exchanges)?

This post was edited on 7/28/14 at 6:00 pm
Posted by Vols&Shaft83
Throbbing Member
Member since Dec 2012
69891 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:05 pm to
quote:

at the time of drafting wasn't there was only one type of exchange planned (via state-created exchanges)?



Details man, they only had 20,000 pages to work with .
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69234 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:05 pm to
Rex, is it your view that only citizens in certain states being entitled to subsidies is a violation of the 14th amendment?
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:07 pm to
quote:

Looks like there's a whole cottage industry devoted to gif'ing me.


Rex is contributing to a stronger economy.

Posted by TT9
Global warming
Member since Sep 2008
82952 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:09 pm to
Rex thread, auto-Upvote
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98432 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:09 pm to
Based on this retarded argument, I guess we can say goodbye to the progressive income tax.
Posted by MSCoastTigerGirl
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2008
35525 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:20 pm to
So you have switched from Hobby Lobby to gay marriage?

Am I reading this correctly? What does the 14th amendment have to do with marriage?

Fwiw, I think gays should be able to marry. It's no one's damn business. Maybe they will STFU.

And wtf does gay marriage have to do with Obamacare? The former only really affects bible thumpers and the gays. The latter affects everyone.

quote:

But I have to reluctantly admit that the drafters and ratifiers of that Amendment never anticipated nor intended for it to apply to same sex marriages.



Between this and the "take errybody's guns" crazies, the founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.


Let the gays marry. Obamacare needs to go.


Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:26 pm to
quote:

TT9




Please bring more than "Our team, yay!"

This post was edited on 7/28/14 at 6:27 pm
Posted by TT9
Global warming
Member since Sep 2008
82952 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:42 pm to
No need too, you dumbass righties aren't smart enough for a legitimate debate, and Rex exposes that every time.
Posted by fleaux
section 0
Member since Aug 2012
8741 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:44 pm to
quote:

No need too, you dumbass righties aren't smart enough for a legitimate debate, and Rex exposes that every time.


This from someone whose profile location says "global warming"

Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:48 pm to
quote:

No need too, you dumbass righties aren't smart enough for a legitimate debate, and Rex exposes that every time.


Such a clever one. In other words, you have nothing to add.

"Go team!"

An Alabama fan.
Posted by deltaland
Member since Mar 2011
90472 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:50 pm to
I agree that the Supreme Court should rule in favor of Halbig and Gay Marriage.

Don't you agree? Or do you oppose Halbig?
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
48009 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:50 pm to
Weak minded dems have to think of things to whine about....even if they haven't happened.

I'm just glad you didn't threaten his life again.
Posted by TT9
Global warming
Member since Sep 2008
82952 posts
Posted on 7/28/14 at 6:52 pm to
quote:

In other words, you have nothing to add.

as much as the 90% on here that downvote him every time he posts. Guess I fall into fray on occasion.

first pageprev pagePage 2 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram