afchief #fundie

afchief #fundie christiannews.net

In Alabama, 81% of the people voted that marriage is between one man and one woman. How can the “opinion” of five terrorists in black robes in Washington carry more weight than the “opinion” of millions of Alabama voters?

A COURT DECISION IS NOT A LAW!! Do you understand that? Roe v Wade is NOT the law of the land. Roe v Wade was an OPINION handed down by judges. Judges and courts do not make laws, but rather merely render opinions.

Did you know that the Supreme Court once rendered the opinion that black men were inferior to whites? Did you know that the Supreme Court once ruled that women had no legal right to vote? Did you know that as recently as 1986 the Supreme Court ruled that there was no right to homosexual sodomy?

Courts only offer opinions. Opinions can change when judges change. The law cannot be changed by a “judge.” If that were the case, our “laws” would be as constantly changing as the “judges” are.

If “judges” ruled that sodomy was illegal in 1986, how did sodomy become “legal” today? Did the law change, or did the “opinions” of the “judges” change?

All this garbage over homo marriage is a cleverly designed smoke screen. Who cares what the Supreme Court says? They are merely rendering their “opinion”. The people of Alabama and 30 other states have already spoken on this issue. No court “opinion” can nullify the vote of the people. Did anyone vote to give Kagan, Sotomayor, and Ginsburg the power to change the institution of marriage? I don’t think so

It takes an Amendment to the Constitution to CHANGE THE LAW!!!!!

34 comments

old comment by

Wasn't Alabama that place where the Top Gear crew was chased off, running for their lives, by hilbillies with shotguns for painting progressive slogans on their cars? Yeah, their opinion matters less to me than the opinion of my current common cold bacteria.

"A COURT DECISION IS NOT A LAW!!"

Pretty sure that is the very definition of "law".

"Judges and courts do not make laws, but rather merely render opinions."

But your outdated, inane, bigoted beliefs do determine what the law is?

"Did you know that the Supreme Court once rendered the opinion that black men were inferior to whites? Did you know that the Supreme Court once ruled that women had no legal right to vote?"

So are you saying those decisions shouldn't have beeen overruled? Wow, you're a massive douchenozzle!

"Who cares what the Supreme Court says?"

If you wanna go to prison, like a certain somebody recently did, by all means, show as much contempt for it as you want.

"It takes an Amendment to the Constitution to CHANGE THE LAW!!!!"

So? You people have demonstrated countless times that you neither know nor care what your own constitution actually says.

EDIT: Common Cold VIRUS, I know. I just wasn't paying attention to what I wrote.

old comment by Wyzard

It takes an Amendment to the Constitution to CHANGE THE LAW!!!!!

No it doesn't, turdbreath. It takes an Amendment to the Constitution to change the Constitution.

For the law to change, it takes the legislature to pass a bill that goes before the POTUS or the state's Governor to sign it in to law.

No, someone can say that the new law is unfair or unconstitutional and it works its way up the legal system - eventually landing before SCOTUS or the state Supreme Court.

Let's take SSM. Some states passed laws banning SSM; some defined marriage as one M-F; others made changes to their constitutions. This was taken before the SCOTUS who ruled that those things were unconstitutional and therefore null. So, you're right, they didn't male a NEW law, that just struck down all the old ones.

So, where it once was illegal for SSM to occur due to some law, that law has been struck down, and SSM is now legal there.

old comment by Swede

Human Rights are not up for popular vote, or Jews would have less rights than Christians.
The five judges in black robes have as work to interpret the laws. They are appointed by the ruling party.
A court decision is an interpretation of the laws.

Courts are people who live in the here and now, and they interpret laws in accordance with today's society.
It's much more than a mere opinion. What you're writing IS opinion, though.
One interpretation of "sodomy" is "all sex not focused on procreation”.
I'd say that the judges were not the exact same set of people today as in 1986, but I could be wrong.

Smoke screen for what?
Who cares what the Supreme Court says? Anyone who wants to call him- or herself an American:
"In the legal system of the United States, the Supreme Court is the final interpreter of federal constitutional law"

The people of Alabama are also merely rendering their "opinion".
The people who appointed Kagan, Sotomayor and Ginsburg were voted in, so in a manner of speaking, yes. And the institution of marriage has just been extended somewhat, like when interracial marriage was made legal.

If it took an amendment to the Constitution to CHANGE THE LAW, you would have thousands of amendments.
Isn't there an amendment saying something about equal treatment? Kim Davis has the right to marry a man (or five), George Takei ought to have the same right, or he's discriminated against due to gender.

old comment by Doubting Thomas

The law cannot be changed by a “judge.”

The law disagrees.

If that were the case, our “laws” would be as constantly changing as the “judges” are.

Um... they are. Or at least when lawsuits over the constitutionality of particular laws make their way up through the courts.

It takes an Amendment to the Constitution to CHANGE THE LAW!!!!!

No it doesn't. All it takes is for Congress to pass a bill and to be signed into law by the president*, and then it has to stand up to scrutiny of the courts. This is how our government was designed, balance of powers and all that. If you hadn't slept or constantly been daydreaming of fingerbanging ol' Mary Jane Rottencrotch during U.S. Government class, you might know this.

*or vetoed by the President and then Congress votes to overturn the veto