Federal judge voids Mississippi ban on same-sex couple adoptions

[Northern Light]

On your last line, the slew of "RFRA"s always include something to the effect "if any of part of this is found unconstitutional, the rest of it is still valid." See, the state governments don't even TRY or PRETEND to enforce the constitution. If they would at least seek the advice of attorney generals, or a system had a check mandating a court's blessing *before* a law goes into effect or appears on the ballot, much of this could be prevented

Another check of course would be that if you vote for a law that is found to violate civil rights you lose your office or ability to vote, full stop

I thought about what I said after the fact and what I said doesn't make sense. I'm expecting the government to honor the Constitution, but the whole point of the Constitution is to limit what the government can do because it inherently wants to grab more power and infringe on rights. So in actual fact the State governments are just proving why the Constitution is necessary and expecting them to be better behaved than they are is wishing for a lot. These people are statists by nature. In MI it's social and religious morality, in other States it might be different kinds of violations. They're all doing it.

 

[chromium]

I thought about what I said after the fact and what I said doesn't make sense. I'm expecting the government to honor the Constitution, but the whole point of the Constitution is to limit what the government can do because it inherently wants to grab more power and infringe on rights. So in actual fact the State governments are just proving why the Constitution is necessary and expecting them to be better behaved than they are is wishing for a lot. These people are statists by nature. In MI it's social and religious morality, in other States it might be different kinds of violations. They're all doing it.

that's an interesting way to look at it, but they all take an oath to uphold the constitution and their job ultimately is to work to the benefit of the citizens. This ban did no good for anyone. They're public servants and they passed and defended this ban - even a year after obergefell - for the most cynical and unacceptable reasons: hatred and political gain. Given those motives and failures, i'm not in a very lenient mood

i do hold that expectation because only a ****ing idiot can't see that this ban violates the constitution. You don't need to be a legal scholar and speaking of which, they have some of those at their disposal. There's simply no excuse for this

 

[Northern Light]

that's an interesting way to look at it, but they all take an oath to uphold the constitution and their job ultimately is to work to the benefit of the citizens.

Evidently that doesn't mean anything.

 

[JANFU]

Of course not. Only the opinions of the left are important to you.

Not at all- I know where you stand on a number of issues, including Jews.

 

[The Mark]

The judge should be arrested for child endangerment.

So far as I know, nothing about same-sex couples adopting children is any more dangerous than heterosexual couples adopting children.

 

[ajn678]

What is bigotry?

Pretty much all of the thoughts you harbor internally and also the ones that you choose to share with this forum.

 

[Paleocon]

Pretty much all of the thoughts you harbor internally and also the ones that you choose to share with this forum.

Objectively define bigotry.

 

[ajn678]

Objectively define bigotry.

A basic definition would be one that harbors ideas or views that are based entirely on illogical or wrong thinking. Hence why people are calling people that say things like you bigots.

 

[JumpinJack]

The judge should be arrested for child endangerment.

If kids of gays didn't do as well as kids of heterosexual couples, would that mean that gays should not be allowed to adopt kids?

The reason I ask is....one study finally done shows that kids of gays do better than kids of heterosexuals in that they seem well adjusted and do better overall in school. Does that mean heterosexuals shouldn't be allowed to adopt? Your concern is for the children, right? And not just another anti-(insert any number of things conservatives are against) position?

 

[JumpinJack]

Two women can't conceive a child. Did you not know that?

Many women can get pregnant. Even lesbians. And some women can't conceive. Even heterosexuals. So...don't see the point in your comment. The subject is adoption. If a lesbian has a child, that child is then adopted by her spouse. The subject being discussed is adoption. Most who adopt, whether gay or heterosexual, weren't able to conceive.

 

[Paleocon]

A basic definition would be one that harbors ideas or views that are based entirely on illogical or wrong thinking. Hence why people are calling people that say things like you bigots.

Begging the question.

If kids of gays didn't do as well as kids of heterosexual couples, would that mean that gays should not be allowed to adopt kids?

The reason I ask is....one study finally done shows that kids of gays do better than kids of heterosexuals in that they seem well adjusted and do better overall in school. Does that mean heterosexuals shouldn't be allowed to adopt? Your concern is for the children, right? And not just another anti-(insert any number of things conservatives are against) position?

If you really believe that, the I'd like to sell you some real estate.

 

[danarhea]

And so what.
Bigotry, sponsored and kept in place by elected officials has no place in people private lives.

Isn't it funny that that party that talks the most about not letting the government interfere with people's lives is the very same party which does just that?

Gubmint bad...... Except when we want it to enforce OUR ideas.

 

[JANFU]

Isn't it funny that that party that talks the most about not letting the government interfere with people's lives is the very same party which does just that?

Gubmint bad...... Except when we want it to enforce OUR ideas.

Letting Religious beliefs run the govt.

 

[JumpinJack]

Begging the question.



If you really believe that, the I'd like to sell you some real estate.

It's not a matter of belief. I just reported facts.

So .... admit it. You would rather children go un-adopted than be adopted by gays, where they would thrive and do well (according to studies). You would rather take your hate out on gays than help children, which in turn is good for the country. That's about the sum of it.

 

[Paleocon]

It's not a matter of belief. I just reported facts.

Yeah, definitely.

Anyway it's prime beach-front Florida real estate. Good neighborhood too. Just send me your credit card info and I'll get the transaction worked out right away.

 

[danarhea]

Yeah, definitely.

Anyway it's prime beach-front Florida real estate. Good neighborhood too. Just send me your credit card info and I'll get the transaction worked out right away.

Not sure if your Nigerian style sales pitch is actually related to the topic. :mrgreen: