LOL Christians are hella against the Same sex Marriage Law

[imnew09]

What are your thoughts on them?

[Nanners]

fu[COLOR="Black"]c[/COLOR]k em

[UK2K]

They need to be more open minded and less judgemental.

Like those people who sent hundreds of death threats and threatened to burn down that pizzeria here in Indiana.

Tolerance lol

#lovewins

[Bucket_Nakedz]

I'm against Christians so whatever they don't like, I support.

[Draz]

These f****ers love restricting other people lives. I'm talking about in general. All of these religions and beliefs have morons thinking they can control someone else's life. To the point where their own lives are being effected by it.. Wtf? Let them fck each other in the ass who cares.

[senelcoolidge]

Well it's a whole lot better than some other religion that would rather throw gays off roofs and burn them. They don't like same sex marriage but they will not persecute you and murder you. They are a whole lot more tolerable than others. Just thank you lucky stars that you don't live in a Muslim or Communist/Atheist country.

[rezznor]

radical christians and radical muslims are 2 sides of the same coin

[MavsSuperFan]

christians stay losing in north america and europe.

[Jameerthefear]

most christians aren't against gay marriage
get real

[Take Your Lumps]

most christians aren't against gay marriage
get real

Anymore*

Because religious beliefs across the board in America and other western nations are getting less dogmatic and more wishy-washy/deistic.

Progress.

[NumberSix]

christians stay losing in north america and europe.

Wow. You sure are happy about the overthrow of democracy.

[MavsSuperFan]

Wow. You sure are happy about the overthrow of democracy.

this is the case you choose to get angry at judicial review?

stay mad

[MavsSuperFan]

most christians aren't against gay marriage
get real

If you're a devout christian you should be. But most christians aren't very devout, which is a good thing

[NumberSix]

this is the case you choose to get angry at judicial review?

stay mad

I am now fully convinced that you don't know what the Supreme Courts role is.

To be clear, the Supreme Court does NOT change laws. If you think gay marriage laws were changed, then you simply dont understand the topic.

As I said, the Supreme Court does not change laws or even make new laws. They DEFINE what the constitutional law already is. I know you're happy with the result, but that is not the point. The Supreme Court did not make gay marriage legal. You need to understand that. What 5 of the 9 justices claim, is that gay marriage already was federally mandated in the constitution this entire time.

I know you're pro-gay marriage, but come on. Don't tell me that you believe that. You know you don't believe that gay marriage has been federally mandated since 1868, just nobody noticed. You know you don't believe that.

You really gonna tell me you're fine with Supreme Court justices saying "oh yeah, it's in the constitution. Yeah, that's the ticket" knowing fully well that it isn't. You don't think that's a bad path to go down?

[Dresta]

I am now fully convinced that you don't know what the Supreme Courts role is.

To be clear, the Supreme Court does NOT change laws. If you think gay marriage laws were changed, then you simply dont understand the topic.

As I said, the Supreme Court does not change laws or even make new laws. They DEFINE what the constitutional law already is. I know you're happy with the result, but that is not the point. The Supreme Court did not make gay marriage legal. You need to understand that. What 5 of the 9 justices claim, is that gay marriage already was federally mandated in the constitution this entire time.

I know you're pro-gay marriage, but come on. Don't tell me that you believe that. You know you don't believe that gay marriage has been federally mandated since 1868, just nobody noticed. You know you don't believe that.

You really gonna tell me you're fine with Supreme Court justices saying "oh yeah, it's in the constitution. Yeah, that's the ticket" knowing fully well that it isn't. You don't think that's a bad path to go down?

All that matters is the end outcome! legal technicalities are irrelevant! (even though our civilisation rests on these legal technicalities, and legal precedents always potentially dangerous). No, of course, interpreting the legal document on which the nation was founded, according to the whims of popular opinion, is not at all a problem (though this had already happened before this ruling, this only consolidates the Supreme Court as the third arm of a popular majority of the citizenry).