Page 19 of 34 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 331

Thread: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

  1. #181
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    In other words Zyph, its all about the PR.

    If this woman were smart, she would have found a way to do it to make those who arrested to look like horrible people or part of a horrible system to gain sympathy for her cause.

  2. #182
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

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

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    In other words Zyph, its all about the PR.

    If this woman were smart, she would have found a way to do it to make those who arrested to look like horrible people or part of a horrible system to gain sympathy for her cause.
    Not all about the PR, but that is a part of it.

    Actually, I guess i should say PR could be a large part of it, but the ability to actually MANAGE the PR itself is somewhat limited. While perhaps giant PR forms can make something out of nothing, often times I think there's a limit on how much you can legitimately spin something one way or another without it becoming so ludicrously obvious you're spinning that you actually cause an extreme negative reaction to come forward.

    For example, if she was smart maybe she could've figured a way to make those who arrested her look horrible or part of a horrible system. However, if she went out of her way to do that one slip up and it suddenly looks like she's purposefully pulling a STUNT rather than making an actual principled stand and is trying to make something out of nothing due to her OWN decisions and actually cause a significant backlash against it.

    I think in MOST cases, it's less about coming up with ways to make the other side look bad that allows your side to do better than is normally expected with CD...but rather a situation where the other side actually naturally does something that makes them look bad.

    I also think part of the issue here is that I don't believe there's a big "fat middle" for gay marriage. I think you've got a lot of people that are primarily on either side with a very small TRULY undecided middle. While those on the end of either side may be somewhat sway able, I think the amount of people that can be easily swung one way or another by such events is small and thus the benefit of it is little. Most who are on the side against gay marriage are going to see this and it's just going to give them fuel while those on the side of gay marriage are going to cheer it and say "Good job" and get excited by someone fighting for their cause. I think that small amount in the middle though see this and kind of shrug, without it having much real effect either way imho because there's such a small sample size to court. So you perked up your side, field the other side, and got yourself in some legal hot water all to attract a small amount of an already small amount to your side and potentially turn away a similarly small amount.

    By no means do I think I'm absolutely correct in my reading of it, but it seems to be my experience watching instances of civil disobedience. Yes, we have some examples back in the 50's/60's of it being successful (though I'd contest the ones we remember and hear about are an extremely small amount of the total that occurred with the majority of them being most inconsequential) but by and large i think most cases of it in the more near present have been middling really. I think in part with the civil rights time period as well it was perhaps so common over such a long stretch of the country and in such solidarity that it amplified it more so then today where...even with the increase in amount of news coverage and way things can reach us...they seem to be relatively random and psuedoly isolated incidents.

  3. #183
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,605

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    I know your focus is on the word "love"........BUT THAT WAS NOT THE POINT. You are missing the point because you think her view on the right is limited to "love"....IT IS NOT.

    The subject was the civil right..MARRIAGE......the subject was not the REASON for MARRIAGE.

    GET OFF THE FALSE ARGUMENT.

    YOU ARE A MOD, START ACTING LIKE IT.
    It's not a false argument.

    If marrying "for love" is not the main point, then what are homosexuals denied that heterosexuals can do? All can marry. If "love" or attraction, or any sexual component, isn't part of it, then what's being denied?

    Nothing.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  4. #184
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    It's not a false argument.

    If marrying "for love" is not the main point, then what are homosexuals denied that heterosexuals can do? All can marry. If "love" or attraction, or any sexual component, isn't part of it, then what's being denied?

    Nothing.
    An Overview of Federal Rights and Protections Granted to Married Couples

    There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections provided on the basis of marital status in Federal law. [1] Because the Defense of Marriage Act defines "marriage" as only a legal union between one man and one woman, same-sex couples - even if legally married in their state - will not be considered spouses for purposes of federal law.

    The following is a summary of several categories of federal laws contingent upon marital status.



    Social Security

    Social Security provides the sole means of support for some elderly Americans. All working Americans contribute to this program through payroll tax, and receive payments upon retirement. Surviving spouses of working Americans are eligible to receive Social Security payments. A surviving spouse caring for a deceased employee’s minor child is also eligible for an additional support payment. Surviving spouse and surviving parent benefits are denied to gay and lesbian Americans because they cannot marry. Thus, a lesbian couple who contributes an equal amount to Social Security over their lifetime as a married couple would receive drastically unequal benefits, as set forth below.

    Family Eligible for Surviving Child Benefits Eligible for Surviving Parent Benefits

    Family #1: Married husband and wife, both are biological parents of the child
    Eligible for Surviving Child Benefits
    Eligible for Surviving Parent Benefits
    Family #2: Same-sex couple, deceased worker was the biological parent or adoptive of the child
    Eligible for Surviving Child Benefits
    Not Eligible for Surviving Parent Benefits
    Family #3: Same-sex couple, deceased worker was not the biological parent nor able to adopt child through second-parent adoption
    Not Eligible for Surviving Child Benefits
    Not Eligible for Surviving Parent Benefits


    Tax

    According to the GAO report, as of 1997 there were 179 tax provisions that took marital status into account. The following is a limited sample of such tax provisions.

    Tax on Employer-Provided Health Benefits to Domestic Partners

    In growing numbers, both public and private employers across the country have made the business decision to provide domestic partner benefits in order to promoted fairness and equality in the workplace. For example, as of August 2003, 198 (almost forty percent) of the Fortune 500 companies and 173 state and local governments nationwide provide health insurance benefits to the domestic partners of their employees. Federal tax law has not kept up with corporate and governmental who take advantage of it are taxed inequitably.

    As policymakers have put an increasing emphasis on delivering health coverage through the tax code and as the cost of healthcare has once again begun to skyrocket, the current inequities in the tax code have placed a burden on the employers who provide healthcare coverage to domestic partners and on the employees who depend upon these benefits to provide security for their families.

    1. Burden on Employees
    Employers who provide health benefits to their employees typically pay a portion of the premium – if not the entire premium. Currently, the Code provides that the employer’s contribution of the premium for health insurance for an employee’s spouse is excluded from the employee’s taxable income. An employer’s contribution for the domestic partner’s coverage, however, is included in the employee’s taxable income as a fringe benefit.

    2. Burden on Employers
    An employer’s payroll tax liability is calculated based on their employees’ taxable incomes. When contributions for domestic partner benefits are included in employees’ incomes, employers pay higher payroll taxes. This provision also places an administrative burden on employers by requiring them to identify those employees utilizing their benefits for a partner rather than a spouse. Employers must then calculate the portion of their contribution that is attributable to the partner, and create and maintain a separate payroll function for these employees’ income tax withholding and payroll tax. Thus, the employers are penalized for making a sound business decision that contributes to stability in the workforce.

    Inequitable Treatment of Children Raised in LGBT Households
    Recent data shows that at least 1 million children are being raised by same-sex couples in the United States. The Code contains competing definitions of “child.” Certain provisions of the Code defining child penalize for the marital status of their parents and caregivers.

    1. Earned Income Tax Credit
    Eligibility for the earned income tax credit (EITC) is based in part upon the number of “qualifying” children in the taxpayer’s household. See 26 USC § 32. The definition of qualifying child under this provision includes only a child who is the taxpayer’s (a) biological child or descendent; (b) stepchild of the taxpayer; or (c) adopted child. Certain children of lesbian and gay couples are disadvantaged by this provision. For exampled, a taxpayer and their partner domestic are jointly raising the partner’s biological child. The taxpayer works full-time and the child’s legal parent stays home to care for the child. The state in which the taxpayer resides does not permit them to adopt through second-parent adoption or to marry the partner and become the child’s step-parent. This working family is therefore ineligible for an adjustment of the EITC, and therefore has decreased the resources to devote to the child’s care.

    continued at the link
    An Overview of Federal Rights and Protections Granted to Married Couples | Resources | Human Rights Campaign
    Last edited by winston53660; 05-12-12 at 05:52 PM.

  5. #185
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    All can marry.
    No, all cannot marry who they choose, regardless of their motivation for marriage. The all in this case includes males who choose to marry males and females who choose to marry females.

    You missed the most basic part of the discussion.

    Try again.
    Last edited by Gimmesometruth; 05-12-12 at 05:56 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  6. #186
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

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

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    If marrying "for love" is not the main point, then what are homosexuals denied that heterosexuals can do?
    Well, it depends...

    One, there's been instances in the countries history where an individualized group that was previously thought to be low in terms of its need for equal protection has been elevated. Homosexuals, already, have been raised from simple minimum scrutiny to a slight variation of it known as a "second order rational basis test" that doesn't quite reach the middle tier of scrutiny under the EPC but requires a bit more than the normal minimum scrutiny. There's an argument, though in my opinion (which ultimately is irrelevant really) a weak one, that already under the current standings for homosexuality that the EPC would apply to them and that the state could not put forth the necessary requirements to meet this second order rational basis test in terms of discriminating against that classification. However, it IS feasible that the court could find that at this point that homosexuals are actually warranted of having a higher degree of protection under the EPC and raised on par with Gender (as a middle tier) or even race (as strict scrutiny) in which case it becomes far more likely that the EPC would apply to them.

    Two, even ignoring homosexuality, there's an issue of gender discrimination. It's not about what homosexuals are denied to do or what heterosexuals are allowed to do...but rather what males are allowed to do/not allowed to do and what females are allowed/not allowed to do. Namely, a male can marry a woman however a woman does not have that same ability...and vise versa. This is discrimination under the law. Discrimination under the law is not inherently an unconstitutional thing...however I believe that the state would be hard pressed to meet the middle tier scrutiny required of them to show why that discrimination IS necessary.

    Finally, while the civil right of marriage is not one that requires love...it is inherent that there is generally no reasonable restriction on the reasons why someone wishes to be married. As such, a person can choose to marry for love. Or for money, or for some other reasons. Because the Civil Right is broadly the right of marriage, not of any specific type of marriage, all those various reasons...as long as they don't violate the law...are legitimate. By limiting homosexuals in terms of who they can marry you are discriminating against them by placing a limit on their realistic reasons for choosing to enter, and with whom they do it with, into a marriage. Again, this goes back to the EPC because discrimination in and of itself is NOT unconstitutional. But you can see from my comments above regarding how that'd apply.

  7. #187
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,605

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    No, all cannot marry who they choose, regardless of their motivation for marriage. The all in this case includes males who choose to marry males and females who choose to marry females.

    You missed the most basic part of the discussion.

    Try again.
    You would be wrong.

    In the state of North Carolina, where I am, I cannot marry my business partner, or my best friend, because we are of the same sex. I would actually have a number of reasons to choose to do this, as Winston listed above.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  8. #188
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    All can marry.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    No, all cannot marry who they choose, regardless of their motivation for marriage. The all in this case includes males who choose to marry males and females who choose to marry females.

    You missed the most basic part of the discussion.

    Try again.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    You would be wrong.

    In the state of North Carolina, where I am, I cannot marry my business partner, or my best friend, because we are of the same sex. I would actually have a number of reasons to choose to do this, as Winston listed above.
    What we have here folks, is a failure to communicate.

    I understand the difference between "can" marry and "cannot" marry.

    Apparently, Harshaw does not.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  9. #189
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,605

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    What we have here folks, is a failure to communicate.

    I understand the difference between "can" marry and "cannot" marry.

    Apparently, Harshaw does not.
    No, I do.

    All can marry someone.

    All are also denied marrying the same category of person that everyone else is denied marrying. If I wish to marry someone of the same sex, I cannot. Thus, I am denied the same thing as others who may wish to do so as well.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  10. #190
    User
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Simi Valley
    Last Seen
    06-19-14 @ 04:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    22

    Re: Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

    wow arrested?! LOL
    I wonder how the cops went about that???
    "Get on the ground now and drop the lesbian marriage license NOW!"

    (This country is ridiculous for how it treats its citizens)
    Why don't they go and fight real crime? All they do down here is pull over speeders and chase around pot heads... (I hate the South)

Page 19 of 34 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... 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
  •