Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 112

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

  1. #81
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,936

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post
    Yeah, I've said that several times already. The benefit, all would receive the same recognition under the law which allows everyone the same rights and privileges that come with it.

    If you feel that doesn't benefit you, then what do you want? Explain it.
    See edit.

    ....

  2. #82
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    See edit.

    ....
    Yeah, and I explained five, six, seven times already. You're willfully ignoring it. Likely due to entrenchment as getting equal right isn't the issue but making those that don't agree with same sex marriage "pay for their opposition" and be forced to do something they view as counter to their beliefs.

  3. #83
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,936

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post
    Yeah, and I explained five, six, seven times already. You're willfully ignoring it. Likely due to entrenchment as getting equal right isn't the issue but making those that don't agree with same sex marriage "pay for their opposition" and be forced to do something they view as counter to their beliefs.
    You can be recognized as married either way, what's your issue?

  4. #84
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    You can be recognized as married either way, what's your issue?


    Should I take this as a concession?

  5. #85
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,936

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post


    Should I take this as a concession?
    You're avoiding my question.

  6. #86
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    You're avoiding my question.
    I've answered, several times. You asked for benefits, I've provided you with them. You also ignored mine. If the changes that would occur aren't what you feel as benefits, what do you want then? Explain it as you've yet to do so.

  7. #87
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,936

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post
    I've answered, several times. You asked for benefits, I've provided you with them. You also ignored mine. If the changes that would occur aren't what you feel as benefits, what do you want then? Explain it as you've yet to do so.
    I know you think you've answered it, but truth is I've given up because either I can't explain the question to you in a way you can understand or you're not capable of understanding it. I don't know, but either way I'm over it. So I've moved on to the part of your post which is probably more to the heart of the issue for you:

    but making those that don't agree with same sex marriage "pay for their opposition" and be forced to do something they view as counter to their beliefs.
    So since your marriage is recognized as valid both under the status quo and in the change that you mention, what do you have to gain from this? Since you cannot explain to me what I have to gain from the change, maybe you'll stand a better chance of defining what's in it for you.

    Bonus question! Why do you think you are legally obliged to recognize marriages you don't feel are legitimate?

  8. #88
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:48 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,158

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

    "Three states where members of the clergy and justices of the peace today marry gay couples argued on Friday that it’s a violation of states’ rights for the federal government to then “unmarry” those people under the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)."
    "Unmarry" means to annul or divorce so the argument really makes no sense. The IRS is under no obligation to provide tax benefits to a couple simply because the state they live in happens to classify their relationship in a certain way.

    There are many examples where the IRS does not recognize State designations - child dependents, business classifications, not-for-profits, etc. Are we to believe the IRS is also emancipating children, dissolving businesses and forcing non-profits to make a buck because the tax code makes different classifications than the State?

  9. #89
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    I know you think you've answered it, but truth is I've given up because either I can't explain the question to you in a way you can understand or you're not capable of understanding it. I don't know, but either way I'm over it. So I've moved on to the part of your post which is probably more to the heart of the issue for you:
    I have answered it, you asked how it would benefit you. I answered that as simply as humanly possible.

    When you say "you can't explain it because you wouldn't understand it" is a clear sign you've lost the argument. In fact, thats utterly ridiculous. Perhaps you can't explain it because I've already nailed your position. You don't want equal right, you want those that oppose same sex marriage to be punished for it. If thats the case, explain it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    So since your marriage is recognized as valid both under the status quo and in the change that you mention, what do you have to gain from this? Since you cannot explain to me what I have to gain from the change, maybe you'll stand a better chance of defining what's in it for you.

    Bonus question! Why do you think you are legally obliged to recognize marriages you don't feel are legitimate?
    Nothing is in it for me. In fact, I have no dog in this hunt either way. Do I have to have a stake in order propose a compromise? In fact, thats generally where the best compromises come from. Again, I've explained the benefit to you ad nauseum, you're ignoring it.

    As far as your bonus, I'm not legally obliged to recognize marriage at all as I offer nothing that would require the recognition in the first place so the question is irrelevant.

  10. #90
    Sage
    Mach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    11,427

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Why do that?
    Because it appears to work well.

    Why does religion get to own that word? I want to own that word.
    Religion doesn't own the word based on what he proposed.
    No one owns the word is the point, including government.
    You can say you're married all day long, you can make an organization that does so based on tradition and witness and ceremony, on an upside down cross, or a rightside up one.
    It didn't assign any authority over marriage to anyone, I think was the point.

    It was a proposal to remove the word Marriage, from government.

    Again, that does not "give it" to religions.

Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... 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
  •