The Amateur Message Boards of the World Famous VoyeurWeb

Ginsburg presided over at least 4 gay weddings, and Kagan at least 1, but neither had the decency to recuse themselves from the gay marriage case.

Talk about unethical.

And the rest have only presided over straight weddings, so I guess they should have recused themselves from gay marriage cases too. They are obviously prejudiced against gays or they would have married some.

Talk about unethical.

Homos are sick.

Straight people are sick too.

What's your point?

They still have civil rights and equal protection under the law.

Comrade Clownloser Lucky gives us a clear view of his complete lack of understanding of American jurisprudence. But he does understand that in the good old days Stalin would just have you "disappeared" if you ran afoul (or even appeared to run afoul) of the Party.

Forward! ClownLoser Lucky!

Here Comrade ClownLoser Lucky will sneer and snarl.....and once again, not having any ability to develop his own style (outside of hate and rage) will mimic my style, that be has found so effective in humiliating him.

Clownsicker doesn't comprehend that hetero marriage was not a case on the Court's docket.

Ginsburg and Kagan were guilty of a shocking ethical breach, but of course the Obama-loving media will ignore it.

johnny, read my post again.

I never said anything about hetero marriage. It is irrelevant to my point, just as all your comments always are.
I said they should recuse themselves from gay marriage cases because they are clearly prejudiced against gay marriage.

You suggested that Kagen and Ginsburg should recuse themselves for being supportive of gay marriage.
But the fact is, there are only two kinds of people: those who don't have a problem with gay marriage and those who do.

There are no justices who don't have an opinion of some sort about it, so the only answer, if we are to take your premise seriously, is to have ALL judges recuse themselves from such cases since having a judge who already opposes gay marriage is not any more fair than having one who supports it already.

You're arbitrarily insisting that only those with preconceived notions in support of gay marriage should recuse themselves but those with preconceived notions against gay marriage need not do so.
Why? Because, as always, you are a hypocrite.

I never re-read posts.

The moving finger writes and, having writ, moves on.

I believe that is from the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam.

Clownsicker doesn't comprehend that hetero marriage was not a case on the Court's docket.

Ginsburg and Kagan were guilty of a shocking ethical breach, but of course the Obama-loving media will ignore it.

A group of Orthodox Jews hired Mexican day laborers to dress in traditional Jewish garb and protest against the New York City gay pride parade Sunday.....

http://www.mediaite.com/online/orthodox ... s-instead/

:lol:

how sick are these fuckers?

I never re-read posts.

The moving finger writes and, having writ, moves on.

I believe that is from the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam.

Clownsicker doesn't comprehend that hetero marriage was not a case on the Court's docket.

Ginsburg and Kagan were guilty of a shocking ethical breach, but of course the Obama-loving media will ignore it.

Good point made by somebody above:

Ginsburg and Kagan were guilty of a shocking ethical breach, but of course the Obama-loving media will ignore it.

These days the Supreme Court is less about determining the Constitutionality of law and more about moving the United States further along down the highway to hell.