Page 25 of 42 FirstFirst ... 15232425262735 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 418

Thread: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

  1. #241
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Illinois
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,335
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    I cannot more clearly point out blatant hypocrisy. If a republican said these kind of things he would be burning in effigy. Wehn people that disagree with you on this site say these very things they are labelled intolerant, bigots, and homophobes. Hypocrisy...yeah...you has it.

    Barack Obama on Gay Marriage - YouTube
    Barack Obama on Gay Marriage - YouTube
    Im sorry that you cannot understand the difference Obama who has done more for gay rights then anyone else and an average republican who fights against gay rights. Its as simple as that.

  2. #242
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    They can do anything they want.......Just don't call it marriage.....that name is taken.
    Sorry but bigots do not have exclusive control over words.
    <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>

  3. #243
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    This should knockdown future gay marriages in this state and when the SCOTUS voids gay marriage then all those other marriages will be voided. Lets see how one of the most liberal states votes.


    DARIUS DIXON | 3/21/12 7:11 AM EDT

    The New Hampshire House is expected to vote Wednesday on whether to repeal the state’s two-year-old law that legalized gay marriage.
    Republicans backing the rollback bill say it would define marriage as between a man and woman, while allowing the state’s nearly 2,000 existing same-sex marriages to remain valid, The Associated Press reports. If approved, the measure would take affect in March 2013 and re-establish civil unions for same-sex couples




    Read more: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal - POLITICO.com
    What a load of bull****. That's exactly like outlawing slavery but slave owners can still keep the slaves they currently own. No, you have to either kill all SSMs or you have to continue to allow them. This is just a pro-ssm stunt to get the court to say that ssm is a right.

  4. #244
    Professor cmakaioz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Last Seen
    01-22-13 @ 02:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,582

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Sorry but bigots do not have exclusive control over words.
    Amen.

    Or to put it in legal terms:

    The state has a compelling interest in the social cohesion derived from *refraining* from unwarranted de jure discrimination against gays and lesbians. Irrational discrimination by the state signifies a kind of second-class citizenship for members of groups targeted by such discrimination, which in turn -- quite rationally -- leads to the conclusion that the state upholds the interests of some citizens over others *without rational cause*.

    The state has no interest whatsoever in preserving the sense of entitlement long enjoyed by privileged subpopulations in laying claim to the cultural meanings (plural) of an institution beyond the law (i.e. who, culturally speaking, is recognized as married, and what the cultural ramifications of a marriage are or arguments about what they should or shouldn't be).

    The appearance of explicit discrimination without rational basis, whether or not such discrimination is borne out in substantive policy, is already more than enough to have a corrosive effect on civic life by giving targeted/excluded populations a clear rational basis for identifying the state as not representing their interests or upholding their rights equally.

    Above and beyond all of these bases, it also remains the fact that all of the societal benefits associated with legally recognized marriage which have been used as a rationale for legal recognition of marriages entered into by heterosexual couples...apply just as readily to homosexual couples.


    Appeal to popular bigotry, and to traditions of theocracy, have no place in valid legal argument here.
    I've moved on to a better forum (scienceforums.net). Facts matter, and I don't have the time or energy for putting up with the pretense that they don't. PM me if you'd like me to get in touch with you when I'm done developing my own forum system, likely towards the end of 2013.

  5. #245
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-14 @ 02:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,824

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    I believe that is already covered. It would require due process.

    Your argument is foolish because it is both outlandish and unimaginative.
    Also, it doesn't balance both sides of the equation: "What if Congress decides it wants you dead?" "Mob rule" is an insult used by those who want Snob Rule.

  6. #246
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-14 @ 02:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,824

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    it is always interesting to hear the 'conservative' talking points when a decision goes against they POV. 'Unaccountable' judges is always a good one trotted out when the Court strikes down all or part of a law as UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Yet that is false, most state judges stand for election, it is the way here in Oklahoma. ALL Judges can be removed from office but it isn't easy. Nor should it be. What is most laughable is the 'conservatives' have had more years to appoint these 'unaccountable' judges than the liberals have. Yet of course any ruling against the right wing agenda gets lambasted as unaccountable judges!

    There is a most excellent reason the check of Judicial Review was part of the Constitution. Without a body to decide if a law, new or old, passes constitutional muster mob rule would ruin the Republic.

    Example- Desegregating the South. The majority of people in Mississippi or Alabama felt blacks should not be permitted in public buildings where whites lived/worked/learned unless they were there to clean-up. They felt it was perfectly legal to deny blacks a place in white-only restaurants, movie houses, hotels and make voting a much harder process for non-whites.

    If left to the states and 'will of the people' who knows if desegregation would ever happen.

    Courts struck down many separate but equal laws, 'sundown' laws, and voter tests. The Federal Government passed massive Equal Rights laws that were upheld in the courts and in some cases enforced by Federalized troops.

    You can call that tyranny I suppose, but we supposedly have unalienable rights that are for all men, not just ones who like 'innies' and not 'outies'.
    Without majority rule, we get ruled by special interests. Minority groups can combine with others and become a majority, or at least a plurality. But that would make them politically active, which those who insult the majority don't want. It would make them less fanatic and willing to compromise to form a coalition, which the anti-majority elitists don't want. Those who preach that the majority is a tyrant want the many ruled by the few. The Snob Mob show their contempt for the majority of their fellow Americans, using minorities to humiliate the majority, which is itself is not in the minorities' best interest, though they are brainwashed to think so by those who seek to manipulate them.

  7. #247
    Professor cmakaioz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Last Seen
    01-22-13 @ 02:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,582

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by PrometheusBound View Post
    Those who preach that the majority is a tyrant want the many ruled by the few.
    Actually -- like damn near everything -- it's not so simple.

    Instead of flat majoritarian rule (which, by the way, we've never had here), or some version of oligarchy (rule by the few...on whatever basis)...

    I endorse substantive democracy, in which the composition of and weight of influence of deciders of a particular policy or decision changes according to an analysis of how strongly constituents are likely to be affected. For example, this is the core of the principle by which people object to outsiders (those with no real stake in a decision) butting their noses into others' private business, like who they marry. On similar grounds, your neighbor wouldn't have much say in what color toothbrush you use, but would likely have substantial say in what kind of fence (or no fence) is raised between your respective yards. Continuing this principle, the actual producers in a given workplace should have more say over work conditions (including safety, pacing, assignment of work roles, etc.) than someone who merely holds title to a business...and so on.

    This would be NEITHER a few ruling the many, nor the many ruling the few, but the many ruling the many...with widely varying subsets within the many being instrumental to a particular decision.

    As this is an inherently cooperative basis for policy, it is and will continue to be fought against tooth and nail by various proponents of coercive rule, but a basic part of our own liberation is taking responsibility for change instead of waiting for others to come along and lead the way.
    I've moved on to a better forum (scienceforums.net). Facts matter, and I don't have the time or energy for putting up with the pretense that they don't. PM me if you'd like me to get in touch with you when I'm done developing my own forum system, likely towards the end of 2013.

  8. #248
    Educator
    Chiefgator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Lake Jem, FL pop:35
    Last Seen
    05-08-15 @ 08:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,172

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by PrometheusBound View Post
    Also, it doesn't balance both sides of the equation: "What if Congress decides it wants you dead?" "Mob rule" is an insult used by those who want Snob Rule.
    I use Mob Rule and I do not support Snob Rule.

    Simple Democracy does not work in a nation of our size. It also does nor work in some manners of discrimination. That is why we have the Judicial Branch to check the laws against the Constitution.
    I promise you that if left to a vote, interracial marriage in the deep south would have been illegal much longer than it was. Even now a shockingly large percentile of people still feel that way LINKAGE

    The SCOTUS is there for a reason. IMHO it's most important job is to defend the small group against the Mob. Without the SCOTUS, interracial marriages would still be the law in a couple of states.
    As a dreamer of dreams and a travellin' man, I have chalked up many a mile.
    Read dozens of books about heroes and crooks and I've learned much from both of their styles!

  9. #249
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,863
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Chiefgator View Post
    I use Mob Rule and I do not support Snob Rule.

    Simple Democracy does not work in a nation of our size. It also does nor work in some manners of discrimination. That is why we have the Judicial Branch to check the laws against the Constitution.
    I promise you that if left to a vote, interracial marriage in the deep south would have been illegal much longer than it was. Even now a shockingly large percentile of people still feel that way LINKAGE

    The SCOTUS is there for a reason. IMHO it's most important job is to defend the small group against the Mob. Without the SCOTUS, interracial marriages would still be the law in a couple of states.
    Snob rule? Really?

    As for SCOTUS's job...it is suppose to be a neutral position, catering neither to the mob or the individual. Basing their rulings on the constitution's letter and spirit.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #250
    Educator
    Chiefgator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Lake Jem, FL pop:35
    Last Seen
    05-08-15 @ 08:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,172

    Re: New Hampshire to vote on gay marriage repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Snob rule? Really?

    As for SCOTUS's job...it is suppose to be a neutral position, catering neither to the mob or the individual. Basing their rulings on the constitution's letter and spirit.
    Yeah, that was what I said when I read his comment... Snob rule?

    I agree about the SCOTUS being neutral. When I said "defending the small group" I meant it as the SCOTUS being neutral and not listening to what mob say. Compare the law vs. the Constitution and leave public opinion out of it. Sorry, I didn't state it very well.
    As a dreamer of dreams and a travellin' man, I have chalked up many a mile.
    Read dozens of books about heroes and crooks and I've learned much from both of their styles!

Page 25 of 42 FirstFirst ... 15232425262735 ... 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
  •