Page 82 of 89 FirstFirst ... 32728081828384 ... LastLast
Results 811 to 820 of 884

Thread: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

  1. #811
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Just to clarify. I am personally in support of SSM and homosexual married couples having the same benefits as heterosexual married couples (ex: adoption, healthcare decisions, visitations, etc.) I personally just don't see it within the US Constitution to say that homosexual marriage is a Constitutional right and that it is illegal for states to define marriage and set the parameters for what relationships they consider as eligible for legally recognized state issued marriages.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  2. #812
    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 disneydude View Post
    What if the voters passed a law that said you can't get married if you weigh over 250 lbs.

    or

    You can't get married after the age of 25?

    Should voters be allowed to pass those laws?
    yes. otherwise we are potentially creating a system where the populace doesn't have an interest in defending the government they do have.
    Last edited by ARealConservative; 02-24-12 at 03:13 PM.

  3. #813
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Just to clarify. I am personally in support of SSM and homosexual married couples having the same benefits as heterosexual married couples (ex: adoption, healthcare decisions, visitations, etc.) I personally just don't see it within the US Constitution to say that homosexual marriage is a Constitutional right and that it is illegal for states to define marriage and set the parameters for what relationships they consider as eligible for legally recognized state issued marriages.
    You have to understand the equal protection clause. The government is allowed to discriminate, even on race/religion as long as there is a "compelling" governmental interest involved. The government is allowed to discriminate in other cases that don't rise to that level, if they can show it involves a "legitimate" governmental interest. The government is NOT allowed to discriminate unless they can show that. The problem that gay marriage opponents have and will continue to have in these battles before the Court is they cannot come up with a legitimate governmental interest to justify the discrimination.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  4. #814
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by ARealConservative View Post
    yes. otherwise we are potentially creating a system where the populace doesn't have an interest in defending the government they do have.
    That is what the legislative and judicial branches were created for.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  5. #815
    Educator Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-02-13 @ 01:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    704

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by ARealConservative View Post
    Quote
    Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    What if the voters passed a law that said you can't get married if you weigh over 250 lbs.

    or

    You can't get married after the age of 25?

    Should voters be allowed to pass those laws?
    yes. otherwise we are potentially creating a system where the populace doesn't have an interest in defending the government they do have.
    That roughly the exact opposite of a libertarian viewpoint.

  6. #816
    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 disneydude View Post
    That is what the legislative and judicial branches were created for.
    huh? I am talking about what happens when you force a system on people they don't agree with.

    your response was nonsensical.

  7. #817
    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 BooRadley View Post
    That roughly the exact opposite of a libertarian viewpoint.
    so? libertarianism is a flawed concept because it doesn't take into count that people are flawed.

  8. #818
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Fine....

    What if the voters passed a law that said you can't get married if you weigh over 250 lbs.

    or

    You can't get married after the age of 25?

    Should voters be allowed to pass those laws?
    I would probably say I wouldn't have an issue in pricniple with a state voting on that thing. I also wouldn't have an issue, and would probably support, people bringing legal suit against it challenging it on the basis that even though age and "weight" are a lower teir category the government would still need to meet a certain burden of proof to justify the discrimination and I don't think it could show it.

    That said it'd matter a bit in regards to what the states constitutions state.

  9. #819
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by ARealConservative View Post
    huh? I am talking about what happens when you force a system on people they don't agree with.

    your response was nonsensical.
    No it wasn't. You responded that voters should be allowed to pass these ridiculous laws because otherwise we run the risk of a system that they don't agree with being foisted on them. I replied that this isn't true at all. What protects the electorate is the fact that we elect our representatives. Disagree with them? Vote them out, and the courts are there to ensure that the whim of the majority is not allowed to trample on the rights of the minority. You might call that "nonsensical" but it is what this country was based upon.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  10. #820
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    You have to understand the equal protection clause. The government is allowed to discriminate, even on race/religion as long as there is a "compelling" governmental interest involved. The government is allowed to discriminate in other cases that don't rise to that level, if they can show it involves a "legitimate" governmental interest. The government is NOT allowed to discriminate unless they can show that. The problem that gay marriage opponents have and will continue to have in these battles before the Court is they cannot come up with a legitimate governmental interest to justify the discrimination.
    I think you need to understand that sexuality is not outlined in the EPC and that the government does legally discriminate based on gender. The Equal Rights Amendment was a proposed Constitutional amendment back in the 70's. It essentially stated that all gender discrimination is wrong and that "equal" rights between both genders must take place. The amendment was struck down for several reasons. If this amendment was ratified it would be completely illegal to deny a man the right to marry a man or a woman the right to marry a woman due to all gender discrimination being illegal under the failed ERA.

    The ERA was not ratified due to the fact that it would force women to sign up for selective service and legally be drafted along with men (currently only males have to sign up for selective service and can be rafted). It would also make it illegal to have male and female restrooms or places due to discriminating against gender. There were several conflicts that would have risen if this amendment was passed and this is why it failed.

    Due to the fact that the government does legally discriminate regarding gender in some cases (like selective service and drafting), I don't think it's right to say that defining marriage between a man and woman by the state (who legally issues the marriage license) is unconstitutional. I think it's a big stretch to say that homosexuality is protected under the EPC and that it's outright illegal gender discrimination for a sovereign state that issues marriage licenses to define what marriage is. It would be a massive overhaul and in my opinion a trampling upon state's rights (essentially forcing them and dictating what marriage is) for the SCOTUS to say that homosexuality is protected under the Constitution and that protection means it's wrong to not extend full marriage to homosexual relationships or to say that it's illegal gender discrimination to not allow citizens of a state to marry within the same gender.
    Last edited by digsbe; 02-24-12 at 03:27 PM.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

Page 82 of 89 FirstFirst ... 32728081828384 ... 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
  •