Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 127

Thread: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

  1. #41
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Lets try and get things straight here. Here is a basic, biological standard. Any form of sex other than heterosexual, vaginal sex between fertile adults is an aberration to one degree or another. A liking or desire for any other kind of sex is a "defect" whether it is learned behavior or genetic.

    I'm using fairly strong terms to get the point across. If we're being strictly honest here, getting a blowjob or a rim job may be a great fun moment, but it doesn't procreate the species. Everything other than the basic is allowed, encouraged or discouraged based on cultural norms. That makes them subjectively, not objectively good or bad. I find the behavior to be abhorrent

    That said...If they don't flaunt their sexual preferences or practices. It is a part of their life, but not what the primary. Same for me. So in my book, that makes us people and we get along with no problems. In this respect, we are complying with our societal norms.

    No problem
    By that logic, heterosexual sex with a condom on is also an aberration. Should it be illegal? It doesn't procreate the species. How about an infertile couple? Their sex does not procreate the species. And this is all forgetting that sex and marriage are not the same thing. (ask any married man) Two dudes can already **** eachother. They already have that right. We're not discussing the right to gay sex, we're discussing the right to gay marriage.


    Quote Originally Posted by kamikaze483 View Post
    Obviously there is that inconsistency currently. I you are gay and marry in DC (the closest place to Georgia where it is legal) your marriage is not a marriage in the eyes of the State of Georgia. I hold drastically different views than most gay people. I think intolerance should be tolerated. If you don't like it, move to another state. I have that choice. I choose not to.

    People have the right to be intolerant. And if there are enough intolerent people in a certain state, and they don't wish for their state to issue marriage licenses to SS couples, that's just how the process works. And if the process is left alone, it will work. People choose. And progress comes. I just believe there is some value in moderating progress. A whole country full of liberals would be end up being a country that is far from free- a country so dependent on their government that freedom is less important than basic subsistence. The intolerent people are the people who are holding the country back from moving too fast toward social and financial progressiveness (which is not necessarily the same as progress). The ebb and flow- the resistance of the people to change- is one of the ways this country has prevented major mistakes and has survived and flourished.

    Change will come in time. I don't believe in rushing it by means of federal intervention. States rights are far more important and far reaching than the issue of SSM.
    People have the right to be intolerant, they do not have the right to state sponsorship of their intolerance.

    Do states have the right to discriminate on the basis of gender? So, if Georgia wants to ban women from voting, that's ok?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  2. #42
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,990

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Good for Washington. If that's the will of the people then more power to them.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  3. #43
    Educator

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    12-11-17 @ 12:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    I think that's true up to an extent. Hence the whole notion of the importance of minority rights vs. that of majority rule. I see the explicit banning of SSM on the part of the states as a clear breach of the 14th Amendment.
    What are the privileges and immunities? The thing is... there is the Constitution, and then there is the interpretation of it in case law and precedent. The interpretation (case law) is almost as important as the Constitution itself as the case law defines what was intended in the Constitution. I believe the privileges and immunities were intended to refer to those previously referred to in the earlier parts of the document.

    I'm playing devil's advocate here. But, for instance, if the Supreme Court found that SSM was a "privilege" protected under the 14th ammendment, this opens the door for all kinds of applications across the country. People could just about get away with whatever- people marrying their brothers, people having multiple wives. I say I'm playing devil's advocate because I don't give a damn if someone has 16 wives and two of them are his sisters. But decisions like that have far reaching implications. This is one reason why I think things that should be left for the states.

    It isn't a bad argument though- but the current interpretation of the 14th ammendment is that everything in the first section of the ammendment is subject to due process, ie. there must be due process before one can be deprived of life, liberty, property... or of "priveleges and immunities." I think due process is being provided on this issue.

    (For the record, I believe that the due process clause was only meant to apply to life, liberty, and property. This means the government can't kill you, lock you up, or take your **** without affording due process. I don't think it was meant to apply to the privileges and immunities listed earlier in the section.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    By that logic, heterosexual sex with a condom on is also an aberration. Should it be illegal? It doesn't procreate the species. How about an infertile couple? Their sex does not procreate the species. And this is all forgetting that sex and marriage are not the same thing. (ask any married man) Two dudes can already **** eachother. They already have that right. We're not discussing the right to gay sex, we're discussing the right to gay marriage.

    Another reason this argument doesn't work well. To make this procreation argument without being a hypocrit, you would never be able to have sex with your wife or husband unless you were trying to have a baby. BS. That isn't even what the Bible says sex is supposed to be. It is supposed to be a sacred joining of two people. It does not have to be about procreation.




    People have the right to be intolerant, they do not have the right to state sponsorship of their intolerance.

    Do states have the right to discriminate on the basis of gender? So, if Georgia wants to ban women from voting, that's ok?
    If a state decided to ban women from voting in statewide elections, I think that would be up to the people of that state as to whether or not they would stand for it. It would not pass the state legislature in any state. But for the sake of argument, yes. If the State chose to do that and that law represented the will of the people in that state (otherwise the legislature would be unseated and replaced and the law would be repealed), then that is a right of that State in my mind. Obviously, in federal elections they must be permitted to vote.
    Last edited by kamikaze483; 01-23-12 at 11:26 PM.

  4. #44
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by kamikaze483 View Post
    What are the privileges and immunities? The thing is... there is the Constitution, and then there is the interpretation of it in case law and precedent. The interpretation (case law) is almost as important as the Constitution itself as the case law defines what was intended in the Constitution. I believe the privileges and immunities were intended to refer to those previously referred to in the earlier parts of the document.

    I'm playing devil's advocate here. But, for instance, if the Supreme Court found that SSM was a "privilege" protected under the 14th ammendment, this opens the door for all kinds of applications across the country. People could just about get away with whatever- people marrying their brothers, people having multiple wives. I say I'm playing devil's advocate because I don't give a damn if someone has 16 wives and two of them are his sisters. But decisions like that have far reaching implications. This is one reason why I think things that should be left for the states.

    It isn't a bad argument though- but the current interpretation of the 14th ammendment is that everything in the first section of the ammendment is subject to due process, ie. there must be due process before one can be deprived of life, liberty, property... or of "priveleges and immunities." I think due process is being provided on this issue.

    (For the record, I believe that the due process clause was only meant to apply to life, liberty, and property. This means the government can't kill you, lock you up, or take your **** without affording due process. I don't think it was meant to apply to the privileges and immunities listed earlier in the section.)



    If a state decided to ban women from voting in statewide elections, I think that would be up to the people of that state as to whether or not they would stand for it. It would not pass the state legislature in any state. But for the sake of argument, yes. If the State chose to do that and that law represented the will of the people in that state (otherwise the legislature would be unseated and replaced and the law would be repealed), then that is a right of that State in my mind. Obviously, in federal elections they must be permitted to vote.
    while I do respect the role legal and judicial precedent play in Constitutional interpretation, I personally do indeed believe that incest marriage and polygamists ARE entitled to the same protections - obviously the practical and logistical challenges for polygamous marriages would be complicated, but personally for me they fall under minority rights that should not be infringed - not by the states nor the federal gov't.

  5. #45
    Educator

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    12-11-17 @ 12:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    while I do respect the role legal and judicial precedent play in Constitutional interpretation, I personally do indeed believe that incest marriage and polygamists ARE entitled to the same protections - obviously the practical and logistical challenges for polygamous marriages would be complicated, but personally for me they fall under minority rights that should not be infringed - not by the states nor the federal gov't.
    I do not disagree. I think there should be much less regulation however. These types of changes should be done by repeal of existing laws rather than passage of new ones. This, eventually, would be a pandora's box our legal system will not be able to deal with quickly enough. Child porn legal? Sex with kids? Obviously one would think not- until the legal age of consent comes into question. There must be parameters. Where those parameters should be set is the questions. And that is the current argument against same sex marriage. I see it as an ongoing discussion and debate which will end in inclusiveness when the time is right. Just like women's sufferage and civil rights... which is why I have respect for the intolerance and for the process.

  6. #46
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by kamikaze483 View Post
    I do not disagree. I think there should be much less regulation however. These types of changes should be done by repeal of existing laws rather than passage of new ones. This, eventually, would be a pandora's box our legal system will not be able to deal with quickly enough. Child porn legal? Sex with kids? Obviously one would think not- until the legal age of consent comes into question. There must be parameters. Where those parameters should be set is the questions. And that is the current argument against same sex marriage. I see it as an ongoing discussion and debate which will end in inclusiveness when the time is right. Just like women's sufferage and civil rights... which is why I have respect for the intolerance and for the process.
    I don't disagree - at the end of the day practical considerations win out. If Georgia does not allow for SSM, then I can't make them pass it even if I want to. It's all a process and yes, inevitably I think the issue will be resolved.

  7. #47
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    By that logic, heterosexual sex with a condom on is also an aberration. Should it be illegal? It doesn't procreate the species. How about an infertile couple? Their sex does not procreate the species. And this is all forgetting that sex and marriage are not the same thing. (ask any married man) Two dudes can already **** eachother. They already have that right. We're not discussing the right to gay sex, we're discussing the right to gay marriage.
    The basic stuff makes babies, which continues the species. But survival of those offspring is benefited by a bonded pair. Sex for fun, of any kind as long as the two like it, strengthens the bond, which enhances survivability of the offspring. So the field is open to debate as whether it is an "aberration" from biologically normal or if it becomes normal because it has a positive effect on not just survival of the species, but its increase.

    A thinking and learned Christian knows that you can't impose your moral beliefs on society or individuals for that matter. Christianity is a personal relationship with God. You don't become a Christian and then have a relationship. The relationship comes first and that makes you a Christian.

    We have a government and a country/culture which respects religion, but doesn't follow one. Therefore, the Christian can't expect the rest of the country and the military to follow Christian morals unless there is a clear majority that favors it, and that moral position has a secular benefit as well. One that outweighs the alternative. One that has a basis independent from religion.

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage - Yahoo! News

    It looks like SSM is going to be legal in most or all the country sooner rather than later. The momentum is increasing.
    Welcome to the divorce rate, you are the 50%.

  9. #49
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by kamikaze483 View Post
    What are the privileges and immunities? The thing is... there is the Constitution, and then there is the interpretation of it in case law and precedent. The interpretation (case law) is almost as important as the Constitution itself as the case law defines what was intended in the Constitution. I believe the privileges and immunities were intended to refer to those previously referred to in the earlier parts of the document.

    I'm playing devil's advocate here. But, for instance, if the Supreme Court found that SSM was a "privilege" protected under the 14th ammendment, this opens the door for all kinds of applications across the country. People could just about get away with whatever- people marrying their brothers, people having multiple wives. I say I'm playing devil's advocate because I don't give a damn if someone has 16 wives and two of them are his sisters. But decisions like that have far reaching implications. This is one reason why I think things that should be left for the states.

    It isn't a bad argument though- but the current interpretation of the 14th ammendment is that everything in the first section of the ammendment is subject to due process, ie. there must be due process before one can be deprived of life, liberty, property... or of "priveleges and immunities." I think due process is being provided on this issue.

    (For the record, I believe that the due process clause was only meant to apply to life, liberty, and property. This means the government can't kill you, lock you up, or take your **** without affording due process. I don't think it was meant to apply to the privileges and immunities listed earlier in the section.)
    Slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy for a reason, and quite frankly I'm completely comfortable with a "slippery slope" to civil rights!



    If a state decided to ban women from voting in statewide elections, I think that would be up to the people of that state as to whether or not they would stand for it. It would not pass the state legislature in any state. But for the sake of argument, yes. If the State chose to do that and that law represented the will of the people in that state (otherwise the legislature would be unseated and replaced and the law would be repealed), then that is a right of that State in my mind. Obviously, in federal elections they must be permitted to vote.
    Quote Originally Posted by 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution[/quote
    The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
    The 14th amendment has also been ruled to incorporate the bill of rights into the states.

    States rights are less important than my rights.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  10. #50
    Sage
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    East Coast - USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:15 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    15,561

    Re: Wash. has enough votes to legalize gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Luckily our constitution calls for separation of church and state.
    It does? Where? What exact document or phrase in our Constitution specifically calls for separation of church and state?

    That being said....Bravo to Washington!!!!

Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •