Quote:

the G-man said:
Actually, I was savoring the moment before I demolish you once again, by pointing out that you have, once again, constructed your argument upon "rayfacts," which are well known to be false.


i find it funny that you have no respect for the declaration of independence.
I also find it funny that you needed so long to respond.

Quote:

In regards to your attempt to induce the reader to conclude that Bush is, for lack of better term, pandering by opposing gay marriage, you have not argued a single point to support your premise. Instead, you have argued the constitutional grounds on which a prohibition should or should not exist.


Bush in 2004 (an election year) pushed for the amendment.
Bush in 2005 did nothing (at least I don't recall a single story where he was actively pushing for it, show me one where he was, ACTIVELY).
Bush in 2006 (election year) pushes for the amendment again.

Quote:

Unfortunately for you, your constitutional argument rests on fallacies.

You have argued that a Judge is constitutionally empowered to interpret the "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness clause" of the US Constitution to judicially impose gay marriage.

There is, in fact, no such clause. Further, the phrase itself appears nowhere in the Constitution.


you're right. the declaration said that. i am such an idiot. i forgot the declaration is looked down upon as jibberish and the constitution has no mention of freedom except.....
Quote:


9th
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."




Quote:

Since the phrase does not appear in the constitution, your argument, again, fails.


founding fathers, bitch. They worked on both of them. If I said Yellow Submarine was on Rubber Soul would you argue the Beatles never wrote it because it was on Revolver?

Quote:

It would be tempting to suggest that, if you spent half as much time trying to research your arguments for factual accuracy, and constructing your points, as you do whining about "unfairness" and spamming forums when you don't get your way, you might not embarrass yourself quite as often.


I hit a nerve, didn't I?

Quote:

However, since your "rayfacts" provide no shortage of amusement to the rest of us, and your arguments tend to make the rest of us look all the smarter, I won't.


okay, G-man. Thanks for proving my point to Rob.

Quote:

So...any other reasons why you think the federal government has no legitimate basis to consider the question of gay marriage



Besides the numerous moral reasons? Or the fact that the constitution has never been about adding discrimination? That in 230 years its approved upon the rights and liberties of the people in this country? That this amendment is offensive to the very idea of what America is supposed to be?
Other than that, none that I can think of now?

Tell me why an atheist conservative wants christian values imposed on the states by the federal government.
You try and play yourself off as more of a economical conservative, not a religious right one.

Bow ties are coool.