Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 645
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 398
Jon Bon 385
Harley Diablo 373
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 265
sharkman29 252
George Spelvin 248
Top Posters
DallasRain70429
biomed160678
Yssup Rider59992
gman4452940
LexusLover51038
WTF48267
offshoredrilling47606
pyramider46370
bambino40335
CryptKicker37087
Mokoa36487
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
The_Waco_Kid35420
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-26-2015, 07:59 AM   #1
timpage
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,249
Default Hucakbee says we should just ignore the United States Supreme Court

Just.....fucking.....nuts.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...t-gay-marriage

He, Canadian Cruz and Bobby Jindal also take the position that we should amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage if (when) the SCOTUS invalidates all state statutes prohibiting the practice.

These are the policy priorities of the Republican Party.
timpage is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 08:32 AM   #2
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,073
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
Just.....fucking.....nuts.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...t-gay-marriage

He, Canadian Cruz and Bobby Jindal also take the position that we should amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage if (when) the SCOTUS invalidates all state statutes prohibiting the practice.

These are the policy priorities of the Republican Party.
But... but.... what about the Bible?
SpeedRacerXXX is online now   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 08:33 AM   #3
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 59,992
Encounters: 67
Default

I suppose that depends on which Bible you're talking about.
Yssup Rider is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 08:38 AM   #4
boardman
Making Pussy Great Again
 
boardman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: In your closet, in your head...
Posts: 16,090
Encounters: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
Just.....fucking.....nuts.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...t-gay-marriage

He, Canadian Cruz and Bobby Jindal also take the position that we should amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage if (when) the SCOTUS invalidates all state statutes prohibiting the practice.

These are the policy priorities of the Republican Party.
That would be the correct way of doing it.
It would also be the correct way of legalizing it if SCOTUS decided to ban gay marriage. Would you be just as upset if someone suggested that?

You do realize what it takes to amend the Constitution, right?
boardman is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 08:43 AM   #5
timpage
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boardman View Post
That would be the correct way of doing it.
It would also be the correct way of legalizing it if SCOTUS decided to ban gay marriage. Would you be just as upset if someone suggested that?

You do realize what it takes to amend the Constitution, right?
Better than you, I suspect. The Constitution doesn't need to be amended to protect the rights of gays. The 14th Amendment already does that......

read...learn.....
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bi...:N:1412336:S:0
timpage is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 08:49 AM   #6
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
Better than you, I suspect. The Constitution doesn't need to be amended to protect the rights of gays. The 14th Amendment already does that......

read...learn.....
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bi...:N:1412336:S:0
Well it did a piss poor job of it for 200 plus years!
WTF is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 08:59 AM   #7
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,073
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider View Post
I suppose that depends on which Bible you're talking about.
Whichever one Huckabee is quoting.
SpeedRacerXXX is online now   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 11:32 AM   #8
Jackie S
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 31, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 14,765
Encounters: 15
Default

Fuck Huckabee.

Leave the Constitution alone.
Jackie S is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 11:56 AM   #9
TheDaliLama
Valued Poster
 
TheDaliLama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 6, 2010
Location: Ikoyi Club 1938
Posts: 6,816
Default

I think all of you are gay.
TheDaliLama is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 12:25 PM   #10
Mr MojoRisin
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Sep 3, 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 7,567
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie S View Post
Fuck Huckabee.

Leave the Constitution alone.
I'll second that.


Jim
Mr MojoRisin is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 01:16 PM   #11
JD Barleycorn
Valued Poster
 
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 12, 2011
Location: Olathe
Posts: 16,815
Encounters: 54
Default

You do realize that the SCOTUS approved of slavery, segregation, and involuntary sterilizations don't you? The SCOTUS has been wrong before and there are a couple of ways to fix it; you can craft a law that gets around SCOTUS restrictions like they did with sterilizations or you can amend the Constitution which is what the founders required. So I don't see (actually I do) why our resident libs are getting in a lather....they're afraid that Roe V Wade might be put on the chopping block. Our locals don't give a rat's ass about that but those are the talking points being sent out.
JD Barleycorn is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 01:23 PM   #12
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaliLama View Post
I think all of you are gay.
There you go confusing 'think' with 'hope'.
WTF is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 01:23 PM   #13
boardman
Making Pussy Great Again
 
boardman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: In your closet, in your head...
Posts: 16,090
Encounters: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
Better than you, I suspect. The Constitution doesn't need to be amended to protect the rights of gays. The 14th Amendment already does that......

read...learn.....
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bi...:N:1412336:S:0
And the 19th amendment invalidated the 18th.

You seem to be missing my point. You stated that some fucktards wanted to amend the constitution to conform with their beliefs if Scotus said it is unconstitutional to ban gay marriage.
I asked if you would also feel the same way about some fucktards wanting to amend the constitution to conform to their beliefs if Scotus said it is constitutional to ban gay marriage.

So what if some assholes want to amend the constitution to conform to their Christian or Pagan beliefs. Damn near everybody has an opinion on it. Those guys are expressing theirs. You got a problem with that?

Regardless of how SCOTUS rules there won't be an amendment passed that invalidates their ruling. We're much too divided on the subject. An amendment can be passed to invalidate any part of the constitution. That doesn't mean it will.

It's much adieu about nothing.
boardman is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 02:02 PM   #14
timpage
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boardman View Post
And the 19th amendment invalidated the 18th.

You seem to be missing my point. You stated that some fucktards wanted to amend the constitution to conform with their beliefs if Scotus said it is unconstitutional to ban gay marriage.
I asked if you would also feel the same way about some fucktards wanting to amend the constitution to conform to their beliefs if Scotus said it is constitutional to ban gay marriage.

So what if some assholes want to amend the constitution to conform to their Christian or Pagan beliefs. Damn near everybody has an opinion on it. Those guys are expressing theirs. You got a problem with that?

Regardless of how SCOTUS rules there won't be an amendment passed that invalidates their ruling. We're much too divided on the subject. An amendment can be passed to invalidate any part of the constitution. That doesn't mean it will.

It's much adieu about nothing.
You're the one missing the point. A person who wants to be POTUS ought not be advancing the argument that the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States be ignored. It's called Rule of Law.....and the system doesn't function properly without it.
timpage is offline   Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 02:27 PM   #15
boardman
Making Pussy Great Again
 
boardman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: In your closet, in your head...
Posts: 16,090
Encounters: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
You're the one missing the point. A person who wants to be POTUS ought not be advancing the argument that the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States be ignored. It's called Rule of Law.....and the system doesn't function properly without it.
You mean like now with the sitting president ignoring the rule of law?

The man isn't saying the rule of law should be ignored. Why does the guy actually doing it get a pass while you focus on someone who has about a 5% chance of winning the presidency in two years.

Here' what Huckabee actually said, not what the headline said:

"If the courts make a decision, I hear governors and even some aspirants to the presidency say well, that's settled, and it’s the law of the land," he said. "No, it isn't the law of the land. Constitutionally, the courts cannot make a law. They can interpret one. And then the legislature has to create enabling legislation, and the executive has to sign it, and has to enforce it."

If the courts interpret that there is no provision in the Constitution to allow gay marriage, will you be just as upset with a Democrat hopeful suggesting it's time we propose an amendment?
boardman is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved