en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/677264 Comments by Buick http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98472232 Jeff, You have too many opinions you equate as facts for a serious rebuttal, so I won't. I just wanted anyone who reads these posts to see it for themselves. Thank you! Mon, 13 Sep 2010 04:06:03 +0000 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98472232 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/11/judges-make-rulings-but-not-laws#IDComment98435064 The Iowa Supreme...protected a minority from the tyranny of a benighted, bigoted majority ONLY, if sodomy is a right! (and it isn't) Please justify your opinion with the genetic science that gender and skin color has demonstrated. Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:34:07 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/11/judges-make-rulings-but-not-laws#IDComment98435064 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/11/judges-make-rulings-but-not-laws#IDComment98433910 Question, If all the Iowa Supreme Court did was strike down a law they considered unconstitutional, exactly how did same sex marriage become legal without legislative input and without violating the traditional and customary practice of local government? Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:23:33 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/11/judges-make-rulings-but-not-laws#IDComment98433910 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/11/judges-make-rulings-but-not-laws#IDComment98431000 cc, I know you wouldn't want to mislead anyone, but exactly what law did the Iowa legislature pass that allows same sex marriage? Sun, 12 Sep 2010 21:57:06 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/11/judges-make-rulings-but-not-laws#IDComment98431000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/court-ruling-no-threat-to-my-marriage#IDComment98430330 "you tell me I have no rights because you disagree with my spritual views" You misconstrued my statement. If you reject the foundational premise of American government ie, our rights come from God, then your disagreement isn't with me but rather the FOUNDERS! Invoking 'equal protection' may give you warm legalistic fuzzies, but it has no meaning until you define what it is you want to protect and provided of course if your right falls under the Founders definition. See there, we can talk without resorting to name calling. Sun, 12 Sep 2010 21:51:14 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/court-ruling-no-threat-to-my-marriage#IDComment98430330 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/court-ruling-no-threat-to-my-marriage#IDComment98320578 Knowing how to resist degenerate change is a very useful skill to possess. I agree. Do you see how your statement means nothing unless you qualify the 'change'? Sun, 12 Sep 2010 05:48:37 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/court-ruling-no-threat-to-my-marriage#IDComment98320578 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/court-ruling-no-threat-to-my-marriage#IDComment98319062 My little clique? Seems to me you're in the 2% little clique. Sun, 12 Sep 2010 05:38:55 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/court-ruling-no-threat-to-my-marriage#IDComment98319062 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98315311 Seems you reject the Founders words. Is it because they clearly acknowledge God? Whether you like it or not (and it appears you don't), your LEGITIMATE rights do indeed come from God. Don't let it upset you. Just because you're an atheist doesn't mean you can't enjoy the God given rights all Americans enjoy, no matter how small a minority you represent! That's the beauty of Judeo-Christian tolerance, we're not afraid of you having your opinion, it's just that we resent a 2% minority running the government. Remember that equal status in our political system is not the same as equal power. That silly idea the Founders penned about "the consent of the governed" - that's in the Declaration too. You're also quick to demand 'equality', a moral term. Not very solid ground for an evolutionist. say what? Sun, 12 Sep 2010 05:23:14 +0000 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98315311 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98156137 I'll not put words in the writer's mouth, so this answer is mine. # 1 The Founders already told you your rights come from God. Do you reject that statement in the Declaration of Independence? If so, you place yourself outside it's protection unless you mount a campaign to repeal that portion of the Declaration. OR GET JUDGES TO IGNORE IT. If you claim rights apart from His revealed will ie, "the laws of Nature and (the laws) of Nature's God" (also in the Declaration) then they are by definition NOT rights and NOT protected under our form of government. Sat, 11 Sep 2010 05:07:09 +0000 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98156137 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98154480 You also falsely claim America was founded as a secular nation without an iota of evidence. Perhaps you missed the first paragraph of the Declaration which states, " When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them,..." Your job is to reconcile the word 'secular' with "the laws of Nature and (the laws) of Nature's God" without your revisionist sources this time. Sat, 11 Sep 2010 04:47:56 +0000 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98154480 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98154425 The opinion of your revisionist sources is not new, but the historical facts in the Congressional Record have more weight. ie Congress passed "enabling acts" which listed the requirements for territories to be admitted as states. Colorado, Nevada, Nebraska and Oklahoma for example all had to fulfill this requirement of Congress. "The (state) Constitution, when formed, shall be republican, and not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States AND THE PRINCIPLES OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE." Sat, 11 Sep 2010 04:47:22 +0000 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/09/vote-for-leaders-who-uphold-declaration-2#IDComment98154425 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/court-ruling-no-threat-to-my-marriage#IDComment97214218 Legitimizing Sodomy and Lesbianism eventually generates the right to TEACH. Exactly as is done in Massachusetts public schools and probably here. How do you feel about indoctrinating kindergartners without parental consent? This is where your mantra of "Tolerance" is nonsense. Mon, 6 Sep 2010 00:53:48 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/court-ruling-no-threat-to-my-marriage#IDComment97214218 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/judges-did-their-duty-ruling-on-marriage-case#IDComment97020953 This is a test. Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:21:56 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/judges-did-their-duty-ruling-on-marriage-case#IDComment97020953 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/judges-did-their-duty-ruling-on-marriage-case#IDComment97020921 Admin, I'm getting the drift. No Biblical comments without your approval. Typical tactics of the crowd that refuses to be judged by any moral standards and yet must pass judgement on moral statements. Why should I waste my time? Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:21:29 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/judges-did-their-duty-ruling-on-marriage-case#IDComment97020921 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/judges-did-their-duty-ruling-on-marriage-case#IDComment97020371 Equality is a moral concept and only valid if there is a Crea*or. Evolution by definition offers no standard of equality because it's based on the supposed theory of bio chemical development. If evolution is true, man has no right to demand equality. It's your choice, G*d and His moral standards or evolution and survival of the fittest. Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:15:34 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/judges-did-their-duty-ruling-on-marriage-case#IDComment97020371 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/judges-did-their-duty-ruling-on-marriage-case#IDComment97015118 Equality of men is only valid if there is a "Creator" who's made us in His image (AND HE HAS). Why? Because the evolutionary model doesn't recognize God or His moral standards. Trust me, equality is first and foremost a moral standard before it can be applied legally! If you believe in evolution, you only have varying evolutionary stages of bio chemical development. As such, equality has no meaning because there's no standard. All you libs/atheists do on this subject is demand the moral standard of equality but deny the Creator who gave you a moral standard in the first place. The Founding Fathers got it right in the Declaration of Independence. They acknowledged the Creator AND the Liberty and equality He alone gives! Without the standards of the God of the Bible - you literally have no basis to demand anything. Sun, 5 Sep 2010 00:27:09 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/09/04/judges-did-their-duty-ruling-on-marriage-case#IDComment97015118 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/08/30/tax-cuts-for-the-rich-hurt-everyone-else#IDComment96295745 Different topic and late, sorry. I wasn't allowed to reply to "Fire judges because they didn’t do their job" 'cause that Letter had expired. You asked me if I dismiss Marbury v Madison? YES! History shows Marbury DIDN'T get his appointment because your favorite President, Jefferson, IGNORED THE COURT'S OPINION! Apparently that fact failed to make print in your revisionist sources. If I were you, I'd drop using Marbury as a precedent for "Judicial Review". You also asked, Courts do NOT have jurisdiction to rule on the constitutionality of statutes? Courts do rule on anything these days, however, a Court has no Constitutional authority to overrule another branch of government. Like the Pope, the Court is not infallible or the final authority in our Constitutional government just because it says it is. You probably don't know the Founders considered the Legislature as having the preeminence among the branches because it was the most directly representative of the people. Why does that matter? Because the Founders said in the Declaration of Independence that our government's "...just powers (are derived) from the consent of the governed.” ie The PEOPLE, That's why the PEOPLE will have a legitimate right to throw out politicians and judges they don't agree with this fall. Especially over fabricated rights like sodomy and same sm. Have a nice day. . Wed, 1 Sep 2010 04:17:27 +0000 http://gazetteonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/08/30/tax-cuts-for-the-rich-hurt-everyone-else#IDComment96295745 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/08/27/fire-judges-because-they-didn%e2%80%99t-do-their-job#IDComment96086191 "judicial review is a bedrock principle of the republic" ? I think you slipped up, you mean Democracy right? Where exactly is the origin of this bedrock principle? The Declaration? Constitution? Tue, 31 Aug 2010 03:15:36 +0000 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/08/27/fire-judges-because-they-didn%e2%80%99t-do-their-job#IDComment96086191 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/08/06/same-sex-marriage-affects-everyone#IDComment91333694 Again, admin must be the first line of defense for you libs. Sat, 7 Aug 2010 04:38:02 +0000 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/08/06/same-sex-marriage-affects-everyone#IDComment91333694 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/07/31/%e2%80%98all-men-created-equal%e2%80%99-includes-gay-people-too#IDComment90696429 You may have no other choice than to accept this psycho babble and conjecture (to defend your position), but in the real world this is NOT SCIENCE. Wed, 4 Aug 2010 00:50:57 +0000 http://oldgo.gazlab.com.php5-15.dfw1-1.websitetestlink.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2010/07/31/%e2%80%98all-men-created-equal%e2%80%99-includes-gay-people-too#IDComment90696429