Indeed, it is blended in "courts of competence." Absolutely true. That means there's no distinction! And yet you keep talking about a distinction between law and equity. There is none. That's the point.
Impossible! The deficit is falling as well as unemployment Obama wrecking economy
- Thread starter ChesusRice
- Start date
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Any Supreme Court Cases challenging the right to marry and be gay??? Whatever vs Texas says buttsex is a right but does nothing to address marriage........argue the Constitutional Case or this is also.........
CI=iRCULAR....................
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
It means the court may distinguish.........................already been covered http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/judiciary_1789.htm
CiRCULAR.................
Why am I arguing the constitutional case? You told me gay rights are in the constitution.
Any federal court can grant the remedies that were available at law and at equity. That's where there's no distinction. The Judiciary Act has nothing to do with it.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
One case and no bother to note any success................cherry picking.
What success is that?
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Who on record has ever claimed they are one of the ones protected??????????? Who has pleaded the 9th?????
You absolutely know my stance on this already.........works for gays, slaves, anyone............which makes this.........
CirCULAR JERKULAR.........................
I don't claim any protection under the Ninth Amendment, which has nothing to do with this.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
You already claimed total authority on this.............................us being equal and you having formulated your opinion already based on your quick "research".......you are expected to know already.......which makes this guess what?
OnE SIDED AND CiRCuLAR.......................
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
It has everything to do with no one claiming rights under God......why is that a problem for gays? Can you not establish a gay religion and worship a gay deity? Do you feel you should not be forced to recognize where your rights come from???
Even if you don't claim the Creator from the Declaration.........you can Claim yourself under the Constitution.
The Declaration and Constitution are founding documents and come together in the pocket version for good reason....you should have no trouble claiming rights granted to yourself under the Constitution though.....
in talking with me and you already knowing my stance on the issue..........claiming the highest law has nothing to do with claiming rights....................is.........
CiRCULAR JeRKULAR
The Declaration of Independence, again, has no legal significance. It is not the basis of our government; our rights, legally, have nothing to do with God.
The gay marriage case is based on the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, not the Ninth Amendment.
You're the one telling me all of this is perfectly legitimate, and I'm supposed to find success stories for you?
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Ya except for defining the whole process of Remedy........and saving it to ALL SUITORS and directly contrasting what you are saying right now as having nothing to do with it.........................establishing this process happens at the state and federal district level of civility.........me having asked you this whole time to distinguish between types of court.
http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/judiciary_1789.htm
So I beg your pardon to answer this question yet again.
Please list all types of US courts real quick, should be no problem for such a researched person as yourself.
Tell weather they are competent for law and equity, just law or just equity.
Include which Constitutional Article they were established from so that we may establish hierarchy of law.
Otherwise guess what???????????/
CiRCULAR
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Which case the one I mentioned both the hypothetical one and the Texas one or some other one?
If the one in question is attempting doing it with the 4th and 5th why not have one doing it with the 9th as well??
You can't possibly think I mean otherwise which makes this bad Comprehension on your part and thus this logic has become..........
CiRCULAR
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
I already covered how the Declaration was not needed....................guess what this is?
CiRCULAR JERKULAR.
CiRCULAR JERKULAR.
All federal district and federal circuit courts are Article III courts; they are all "competent for law and equity."
The Judiciary Act grants the federal courts it established original jurisdiction over maritime/admiralty; it saves to suitors the right to seek common law remedies in state courts, concurrent with that jurisdiction. I dispute none of this. The problem is that you haven't shown why it is significant to currency redemption, which has nothing to do with admiralty law.
The point is that your claims about rights have nothing to do with the reality of rights. None of it relates to the Ninth Amendment; make your case all you like, but if gay marriage is upheld at the supreme court, it has nothing to do with the Ninth Amendment.
Then stop telling me my rights come from God and stop telling me that the constitution and declaration are such excellent bedfellows. One is the law and one is not; your claims about rights can only be based in one and cannot possibly be based in the other. That only makes sense if you are talking in a personal philosophical sense instead of in a legal sense.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
All this is proof Fed Notes are money of account only and only enjoy being denominated in dollars and not being actual dollars as you were confused about earlier. All the lawful money values point to this conclusion. How much money does it take to purchase Money? What is Money? This is the true measure of value and human effort will always reflect this value including the industrial demand we both referenced already....silver is but one form... . Which is why the guy pumping gas back in the day for 1 dollar way back in the "hard times" days actually made more Money than most nurses today.