Mohican's Miscellaneous Meanderings

[mohican]

Ah! The differences between the world that should be and the world that is.

 

an Example http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-same-sex-marriage-should-be-constitutional-right-n342131

 

Hillary Clinton: Same-Sex Marriage Should Be a 'Constitutional Right'

If one bets on SCOTUS cases, put your money on SCOTUS using an ever broader interpretation of the 14th amendment to grant this as an equal right and privilege.

 

Will any of the SCOTUS justices perform a word search for the word "marriage" in the constitution, and when it is not found then apply the 9th and 10th amendments? Don't hold your breath.....

 

I posted that April 2015. Prophetic?

 

I would say that we have seen more government induced social change in the last year then in the last thirty or so years.

[MLD Woody]

The social change is happening regardless.

[mohican]

That is a very poor excuse.

 

And following the 10th amendment puts the brakes on a lot of things.

[MLD Woody]

The government doesn't create social change. The people do.

[calfoxwc]

activist judges do. judges who rule outside of the Constitution, and not

in accordance with it.

[MLD Woody]

No Cal. A few "activist" judges don't make the people support something like gay marriage. That support would already have been growing before that.

[Clevfan4life]

Cal still wont accept that the majority of the country just isnt that conservative will he?

[calfoxwc]

you two miss the point, as always?

 

The liberal people don't make legislated social directives, outside

of our Constitution.

 

When society is forced to change because of a gov court/dirtbag president ORDER,

that is the gov that changed it.

 

Regardless of how more people accept something, the gov stepping in to demand that

those who don't accept it.... had better accept it or else...

 

The people didn't do that. the activist, anti-Constitution power mongers in gov did.

[Clevfan4life]

So the govt need not accept the will of the people? I servwhat ur argument is and ur not 100% wrong, but there is a larger point to be made that things like civil rights for women snd minorities might still be debated in the legislature if it were left to them

[calfoxwc]

NOT when it is contrary to our Constitution. You're a liberal, minorities have rights.

 

The general majority doesn't get have their government enforce that blacks are inferior because of the color of their skin.

 

Majority doesn't rule - our Constitution rules.

[MLD Woody]

We had a constitution and blacks were second class for a long time. Conservative views in the past would have kept them that way.

 

 

The govt doesn't drive social change. The govt reflects the will of the people.

 

 

No one is forcing you to accept gay marriage. The changes in laws are just to prevent you from openly discriminating against them.

 

 

The constitution can be modified Cal. That's the point. It is a living document. To think it was written hundred of years ago so Thar it would never have to change is Retarded.

[Clevfan4life]

Yup, blacks a 3/5th of a person according to our "divinely inspired" original constitution. One of the biggest reasons talk of deifying our founding fathers falls on deaf ears with me