Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 112

Thread: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

  1. #101
    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: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    What you're talking about are what the proposed change would (and could) entail. I'm talking about what is, right now.
    Ahh. Well, my view is without that change the mach outlined, then we should just give everyone the right to be married and not care of some get offended. Its not harming them anyway.

  2. #102
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,970

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    Ahh. Well, my view is without that change the mach outlined, then we should just give everyone the right to be married and not care of some get offended. Its not harming them anyway.
    Right now, the way it seems to me is that so long as nobody is being directly harmed (conceptual or abstract harm doesn't count) and so long as everyone is treated equally, being offended isn't a good enough reason to change the system around.

  3. #103
    Sage
    Mach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    11,438

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    I thought the whole reason for any of this coming up in the first place was so that religious organizations didn't have to see the word "marriage" used for anyone but the religious.
    I don't see how that could be true. Many non-religious people are routinely married, legally, and it's called marriage. Prohibiting gays from being married doesn't change that, so if that is the reason, it's irrational.

    If, as you say, atheists, pagans and homosexuals can be "married" how does this change achieve that?
    They already can, so this change is neutral on that issue.

    If someone is very religous, they should be quite happy with the freedom to both legally join (whatever the word), and to be MARRIED in say, the catholic church. They can tell people, "We were married in the catholic tradition", or whatever, and it would be true, and would have whatever meaning it has in that subculture or the wider nation. The idea that this would be insufficient, seems absurd.

    Fishstyx just proposed this as an alternative. If it's pros aren't want is desired by the parties, then as megaprogram points out, fine, just allow anyone to be married. If it's government, it can't be religious, end of discussion right?

  4. #104
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post
    "Marriage" is a civil and religious institution, to claim otherwise is simply false. Churches or private families agreements were the only "marriage licenses". Wasn't until the late 1800s when States got involved. So, if you change the term "marriage" to one of the ones I proposed, under the law, it allows private institutions to decide their "marriage" guidelines. Would also allow churches in favor of same sex unions to use the term marriage as well.

    And at the end of the day, "marriage" would likely remain common in the description of two people together under a legal union.
    Um no, you can walk down all the aisles in all the churches you want, you're not married until you get that piece of paper from the state. Marriage *USED* to be a religious institution. It hasn't been for a very long time. A religious ceremony is a wholly optional observance that you can choose to have in addition to filling out paperwork and paying your fees to the state. Filling out paperwork and paying your fees to the state is not optional if you want to be married.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  5. #105
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    Ultimately, this is why I agree that gocernments should adopt new terminology, than people can define marriage how they see fit and nobody else has to care.

    We have issues of actual importance to not be distracted from by stuff like this.
    But you know that's not the problem. You could call it "mashed potatoes" and the religious would be up in arms because their "mashed potatoes" shouldn't be the same as a gay couple's "mashed potatoes". It's not an issue of terminology, it's an issue of religious wingnuttery.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  6. #106
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Darroll View Post
    Some Gays are a bunch of trouble makers.
    Some religious people are a bunch of idiots. So?
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  7. #107
    Elitist as Hell.
    Einzige's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-29-16 @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,655

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    I'm glad to see that the strategy I've always advocated - hooking the fight for gay rights into a states' rights argument - is taking off.
    I dip my forefinger in the watery blood of your impotent mad-redeemer (your Divine Democrat — your Hebrew Madman) and write over his thorn-torn brow, “The true prince of Evil — the king of the Slaves!”
    - Ragnar Redbeard, Might Is Right, 1890

  8. #108
    Student
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    10-17-14 @ 03:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    189

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    I'm getting tired of all the gay BS.
    Just live and let die. quote ?

  9. #109
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,722

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post
    They don't, they get to choose who they perform marriage ceremonies for.
    This is already the case and always will be.
    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. #110
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,970

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    I don't see how that could be true. Many non-religious people are routinely married, legally, and it's called marriage. Prohibiting gays from being married doesn't change that, so if that is the reason, it's irrational.


    They already can, so this change is neutral on that issue.

    If someone is very religous, they should be quite happy with the freedom to both legally join (whatever the word), and to be MARRIED in say, the catholic church. They can tell people, "We were married in the catholic tradition", or whatever, and it would be true, and would have whatever meaning it has in that subculture or the wider nation. The idea that this would be insufficient, seems absurd.

    Fishstyx just proposed this as an alternative. If it's pros aren't want is desired by the parties, then as megaprogram points out, fine, just allow anyone to be married. If it's government, it can't be religious, end of discussion right?
    If this is the case then your position for why marriage should be taken out of the government is less clear than it ever was to me.

Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 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
  •