|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
meegbear (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 10:38 AM Original message |
Cuccinelli: Gay men and women are excluded from the 14th amendment’s protections |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kestrel91316 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 10:44 AM Response to Original message |
1. Of course. Because gay men and women are not fully human. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
roguevalley (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 01:37 PM Response to Reply #1 |
12. virginia has lost its marbles. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheWraith (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 10:45 AM Response to Original message |
2. The framers of the First Amendment never thought of the idea of a computer. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rex (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 10:49 AM Response to Original message |
3. Cuccinelli believes that only 'certain' Americans have rights |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
qazplm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 10:57 AM Response to Original message |
4. what evidence is there |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dyingnumbers (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 11:07 AM Response to Original message |
5. Since when was an amendment needed... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hosnon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 11:09 AM Response to Original message |
6. I hate this type of argument. It should die a quick death and be rightfully ignored by all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Pab Sungenis (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 11:28 AM Response to Original message |
7. Wait for Elena Kagan to get on the court. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Winterblues (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 12:33 PM Response to Original message |
8. He needs to read the amendment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gratuitous (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 01:34 PM Response to Reply #8 |
10. It starts off with the words "All persons" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
friendly_iconoclast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 12:45 PM Response to Original message |
9. I hate 'cafeteria constitutionalists' with a passion nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solly Mack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 01:35 PM Response to Original message |
11. K&R |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
redqueen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 01:46 PM Response to Original message |
13. Wow... so he's actually trying to argue that they're not people? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
unblock (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-30-10 02:03 PM Response to Original message |
14. the best i can hope is that he's confusing the 14th amendment with the civil rights act of 1964 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rudolfhern (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-01-10 11:57 AM Response to Original message |
15. Two words for Cuccinelli: James Buchanan |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rudolfhern (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-01-10 12:59 PM Response to Original message |
16. Cuccinelli is IGNORANT of recent SCOTUS decisions involving the 14th Amendment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Blue_Tires (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-01-10 01:00 PM Response to Reply #16 |
17. good points, and welcome to the site! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-01-10 01:18 PM Response to Original message |
18. He must REALLY like that "3/5 of a citizen" part. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rudolfhern (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-02-10 05:06 PM Response to Original message |
19. Could the framers of the 2nd Amendment possibly contemplate assault weapons? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Wed May 08th 2024, 02:30 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC