Page 46 of 89 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 884

Thread: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

  1. #451
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,626

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    He's paid to legislate based on his best judgement. If his judgement is made up based on his moral convictions then yes, he is.
    He's paid to legislate, representing the people. Again, his moral convictions are no more important than yours or mine.

    Absolutely. That is the wonders of the representitive republic. The thing you're doing however is assuming that those who voted for him didn't do so with the hope and/or belief that his judgements would tempered by his moral convictions.
    It's his position on this. He has stated that the people will pass it. It would be a little different if he was unsure. He is legislating based on his morals, OPPOSING those he represents. Not what he's paid to be doing.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #452
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I live in NJ. Not a fan of Christie at all... I will certainly help to get him voted out of office in 2013. He'll probably veto this, but it really doesn't matter. Nationwide polls are showing that support for gay marriage keeps rising every year. My guess is that within the next 10 years, it will be legal. Anti's with continue to complain, but once it's legal, it will be a whole lot easier to ignore their complaints, especially since, with the exception of religious reasons or wanting to get government out of marriage altogether, no anti has ever presented a logical opinion against SSM. At least not one that I could not destroy.
    Maybe the logic escapes you.

    If individuals of a government want to give perks to people that get good grades, nobody complains. Where has it been proven that getting good grades is in the best interest of the state? Do we need proof?

    Yet if the same residents try to give perks to the type of stable union that can physically produce kids, we are told that is not allowed.

  3. #453
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,940

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    He's paid to legislate, representing the people. Again, his moral convictions are no more important than yours or mine.
    And you or I can use our moral convictions to decide who we vote for, or how we vote on ballot initiatives and similarly he can use his moral convictions to decide how he legislates.

    There is no requirement what so ever that one can not allow their moral views influence how they choose to participate in government.

    It's his position on this. He has stated that the people will pass it. It would be a little different if he was unsure. He is legislating based on his morals, OPPOSING those he represents. Not what he's paid to be doing.
    The people he's paid by elected him in to represent them to the best of his ability. What consistutes the best of his ability is HIS JUDGEMENT. If the people don't like it, then they have a chance to vote him out later....no different then they'd have if he did exactly what the polls told him "the people" wanted and then they still voted him out.

    It is no less legitimate to ignore polls and what they say the "people want" then it is to follow them strictly. Representitives in government are elected to do the job to the best of their ability and to represent the people to the best of their ability...they are not elected, and there is zero requirement that they act in such a way, to do exactly what polls say the people want.

  4. #454
    Finite and Precious
    Jredbaron96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    With you.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    7,873
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by ARealConservative View Post
    Maybe the logic escapes you.
    Yet if the same residents try to give perks to the type of stable union that can physically produce kids, we are told that is not allowed.
    I fail to see how allowing gays to marry would negatively impact the amount of children being created.

    Apologies if I misread your post. I'm not in the best of states right now.
    "Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough."
    -FDR

  5. #455
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,952

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    It seems the reason Christie vetoes this is because he wants the state as a whole to vote on a referendum. This is the correct course of action and I support his decision to veto in this case.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  6. #456
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Jredbaron96 View Post
    I fail to see how allowing gays to marry would negatively impact the amount of children being created.

    Apologies if I misread your post. I'm not in the best of states right now.
    I asked if we have to prove that the perk we reward actually creates the intended benefit.

    Many people feel that children from stable two parent families tend to be more responsible adults and children from broken homes have a higher rate of requiring government aid. I don’t know if this is true, but it certainly seems reasonable.

    Mentally challenged people should be able to complain about state financial aid in the same manner gay people can complain about marriage. A disabled person can’t help that he was born in such a manner, and has every right to this perk as a gifted student.

  7. #457
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Now I know why I had never heard of it, the whole lets pretend that Sub-Sahara Africa has actually been culturally or scientificly significant to the world or that there where any "great civilizations" there that were the basis or foundation for future civilizations, movement didn't start until after I graduated high school.
    Actually, a lot of civilizations have allowed such things. The one in Africa (which has been allowed for centuries, not just recently) is one example that is easy to find evidence for. There have also been recorded marriages between people of the same sex in Rome and Greece, pretty large cultures/societies and pretty significant to us.

    Plus, many of the older pagan religions had zero issue with same sex marriage, from what we know.

    And there are several cultures now that allow same sex marriage, including some of our own states. Heck, same sex relationships between women were encouraged during the 1800s in an effort to "prepare young women for pleasing a husband while eliminating the chance of her losing her virginity prior to marriage". (I learned this in HS while doing research for this topic for a debate then.)

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Wow, one whole case to point to. Ok, accepted that it happened, but what about other cultures?
    It actually was a common practice in China.

    Ghost marriage (Chinese) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Other societies allow such things as well.

    Woman marries dead boyfriend - SpecialsStrangeButTrue - www.smh.com.au
    Posthumous marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Undoubtedly this has been true for the Aristocracy in many countries, but only to the Aristocracy and not the common people or common culture. Peasant farmers and other laborers really did not concern themself's with "Family ties", I am sure there are some exceptions, but then we are discussing the overall view, not a few exceptions.
    No, marriage has been about property and family ties for every class of people, not just aristocracy. Families used marriages to try to increase their status or wealth from all walks of life.

    Marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Love or attraction being the basis for most marriages, especially in "civilized" cultures is a very recent phenomenon. In fact, it is only about a century old.


    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    What does all of this have to do with "modern" marriage, simple, the modern incarnation is evolved and handed down from previous generations. "Conservatives" in this case are conservative about changes and only adopt those changes slowly, "Liberals" are liberal about making changes. And why should we be concerned, simple, every previous "Democratic" culture, the ones we based ours on anyways, experienced "Moral Decay" and the break down of Marriage right before their fall. Does this "Moral Decay" and break down of marriage cause the collapse? That is a whole other topic for debate and there is a plethora of views on that subject, but, it cannot be denied that the decay and breakdown of marriage traditions did occurr, especially in Greece and the Roman Republic (Later, the Roman Empire after Julius Ceasar ceased power) Augustus Ceasar difinitly fought against that decay, he imprissoned his own daughter on a remote island for committing adultry.

    So, other Democracies experienced "Moral Decay" and breakdown of traditional marriage just prior to their collapse, The US today started off as a Democracy and is currently seeing the same "Moral Decay" and breakdown of traditional marriage, not hard to see why many could conclude that America is about to fall unless we re-establish "Moral Decency" and traditional marriage. And this "Decay" is also coming at a time when we see our Economic strength declining, our military strength being stipped away and the country is mounting up indecent amounts of debt that we may never be able to repay without creating an unsustainable tax burden on our productive citizens. It would seem that that writing is on the wall and we are quickly heading towards collapse unless we change things.
    First, your morals are different from mine. I believe there is nothing morally wrong with same sex relationships or homosexuality. They are not immoral at all to me.

    Second, your logic doesn't fit in this case since most of those cultures that did have same sex marriages outlawed such things just before they started to decline as civilizations. This would mean that outlawing same sex marriage would be more in line with a decline in a civilization.


    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Interesting, prior to this, I only knew of Mississippi allowing first cousins to marry, guess it is the only state that allows it and doesn't put a restriction on it.
    Actually, the states are split almost evenly among those who allow with no restrictions and those who outlaw such marriages, with the exceptions being those states I mentioned.

    BTW, all those first cousin marriages are legally recognized by the US government as well, including those that have restrictions. Which means that procreation or the ability of a couple to procreate must not be that important to the US government either.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  8. #458
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by ARealConservative View Post
    Maybe the logic escapes you.

    If individuals of a government want to give perks to people that get good grades, nobody complains. Where has it been proven that getting good grades is in the best interest of the state? Do we need proof?

    Yet if the same residents try to give perks to the type of stable union that can physically produce kids, we are told that is not allowed.
    If the ability to physically produce children was the limiting factor, you would have a point. But procreation is not the limiting factor here, sex is.

    They are not limiting infertile relationships. They do not have an age limit that women cannot pass if they want to be legally married. They don't even have a question on the marriage license about whether the couple wants to produce children or can have children or if they are purposely limiting/extinguishing their ability to have children.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #459
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    If the ability to physically produce children was the limiting factor, you would have a point. But procreation is not the limiting factor here, sex is.

    They are not limiting infertile relationships. They do not have an age limit that women cannot pass if they want to be legally married. They don't even have a question on the marriage license about whether the couple wants to produce children or can have children or if they are purposely limiting/extinguishing their ability to have children.
    Same with grade based financial aid. A person in their 70’s going back to school to get a higher education doesn’t seem all that beneficial to the state. Was it proven that this is of use to the state?

    Like grade based perks, it is a rather mindless decision society makes to give benefits to those that fit the bill.

    As a libertarian, disagree with giving these perks is obvious, but I fail to see why giving them is ok for one and not the other.

  10. #460
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Is holding hands in public flaunting? Hugging? Kissing?

    If it were men, yes.
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

Page 46 of 89 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... 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
  •