Page 14 of 36 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 357

Thread: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

  1. #131
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    All due respect, that is not a "right". No one is denying them the opportunity to be with whomever they choose for as long as they choose, doing whatever they choose, within other constraints that apply to all (such as age of consent, etc.)



    Yes, but this first assumes that marriage is a "right". That has not been determined. Further, as this was a CA case, CA Civil Unions already grant all those privileges to a same-sex union. As noted earlier, and established in Law, the government has a vested interest in promoting opposite sex marriage, in that it better regulates and promotes procreation.




    Which may make tomorrow's hearing all the more interesting.



    I think there a broad difference between those who oppose SSM, and those who would also oppose just the creation of a civil union, or such as a power-of-attorney, that would allow a same-sex couple to have full visitation rights in case of hospitalization. There are plenty of ways for same-sex couples to obtain that privilege.



    You are assuming that the institution of "Marriage" is a right, and are muddling it with "privileges". I do not yet see where anyone linked to a valid "equal protection" argument either. As we have a DOMA that has not been deemed Unconstitutional, and do not otherwise have a right for any two folks to get married, much less 3, there is no foundation for an "equal protection" case. Heck, 41 states currently do not allow SSM.



    I reject your argument. First off, I see a law as needing an affirmative value, or in this case, as protecting a clear "Right". That has not been at all established with SSM. Your argument could otherwise be applied to polygamy.

    I also reject the "what if ... taking away something important to me" argument. That is to assume that I had something to begin with, and that it was now being legislated against.
    Ok lets take away the "rights" question for a moment. Is there any reason why people should not be allowed to enter into a "contract" of marriage with another person of the same sex and receive all the benefits as any other two people gain from that marriage? I talk a lot about the military because that is where its personal for me, but is there any reason why if two men want to marry why the one who is not a Soldier should not receive military health care the same way the non-spouse of a man/woman relationship would?

    What possible reasons exists to not allow for gay marriage? Is there a definitive link between birth rates and allow gay marriage? Does not allowing gay marriage really increase birth rates? And even if it did, should the state really be using gay marriage as a means to influence the birth rate?

    And can we look back to interracial marriage for some legal context? In Loving v. Virginia of 1967 the SCOTUS ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violated the 14th amendment rights of those individuals who wanted to marry outside of their race, specifically under the equal protection clause. Not only that but in the Court's opinion on the ruling it specifically stated that marriage was a right. So why can we not now over 40 years later, say that anti gay marriage laws are unconstitutional under the 14th amendment? That for the government to say you can only marry outside your sex is violating equal protection?

    Loving v. Virginia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  2. #132
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've seen it explained both ways, so I'm not sure what to think.
    I want to say that they may decide that CA can do what CA wants to do (or has done). That this case does not meet Constitutional muster either way.

  3. #133
    The Light of Truth
    Northern Light's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,968

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    I don't have a lot of faith that SCOTUS will knock down prop 8 because they are too concerned about political climate. What I don't understand is how prop 8 can pass the Equal Protection smell test in this country. If we acknowledge that gay people are equal citizens in today's world, then SSM is not creating a new right but rather extending an existing one.

    The answer should be obvious, but America has become upside down backwards land as of late so I can't expect the courts to make a sane ruling.

  4. #134
    Curmudgeon


    LowDown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,564
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Dammit, some one beat me to it with the link. SCOTUSBlog, always excellent reading.


    Slippery slope arguments are inherently weak.


    Do you have any clue what a victim is? It's something that SSM does not have. False comparisons are false.



    Your opinions on gays is irrelevant.
    Slippery slope arguments often have a lot of predictive power. Who would have guessed that we would slide down into taking gay marriage seriously except those who have pointed to the decline in traditional values overall?

    Victims are irrelevant as far as the definition of marriage is concerned. But then liberals often claim that people offended by what others say are thereby victims, so why not people who are offended by gay marriage?

    Funny to see people claiming that opinions are irrelevant in a debate forum.

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --HL Mencken

  5. #135
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    Ok lets take away the "rights" question for a moment. Is there any reason why people should not be allowed to enter into a "contract" of marriage with another person of the same sex and receive all the benefits as any other two people gain from that marriage? I talk a lot about the military because that is where its personal for me, but is there any reason why if two men want to marry why the one who is not a Soldier should not receive military health care the same way the non-spouse of a man/woman relationship would?
    That comes down to the basic definition of "marriage", again raised by Scalia today. There are also remedies to the above that do not require changing that definition. CA already has laws that apply within its jurisdiction. The question is then if it is proper for the Federal Government, with such as the Military, to not also allow those privileges outside of traditional marriage. That is a different question than redefining the qualifications for the legal institution of Marriage.

    I have personal interests too, btw. I am ex-military. I have a brother legally married to his same-sex spouse. So I am qualified too


    What possible reasons exists to not allow for gay marriage? Is there a definitive link between birth rates and allow gay marriage? Does not allowing gay marriage really increase birth rates? And even if it did, should the state really be using gay marriage as a means to influence the birth rate?
    That is a non-sequitur. I am not arguing the feel-goodedness of gay marriage, one way or the other. Frankly, I do not care.

    And can we look back to interracial marriage for some legal context? In Loving v. Virginia of 1967 the SCOTUS ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violated the 14th amendment rights of those individuals who wanted to marry outside of their race, specifically under the equal protection clause. Not only that but in the Court's opinion on the ruling it specifically stated that marriage was a right. So why can we not now over 40 years later, say that anti gay marriage laws are unconstitutional under the 14th amendment? That for the government to say you can only marry outside your sex is violating equal protection?

    Loving v. Virginia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    This argument got ripped to shreds today. I encourage folks to listen to the approximately 90 minute presentations. There are no tangible legal argument parallels between the case for inter-racial marriage and same-sex marriages, in that the reasons for overturning bans on the former do not apply to the latter. This was clearly noted by two Justices (Roberts and Scalia, I think). Note that the audio of today's proceedings does not identify who is speaking, unless one is addressed by title by someone speaking.

  6. #136
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,813

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've seen it explained both ways, so I'm not sure what to think.
    If SCOTUS kicks it back on procedural grounds, the existing ruling stands. The 9th circuit court overturned prop 8 in February of last year.

    I'm pretty sure that 10 years ago or so people would have held out same sex marriage as an example of a ridiculous, impossible slippery slope outcome.
    It's not a slippery slope outcome to begin with. Animals cannot enter legal contracts, people can. Gay people are people and nobody has ever questioned that. There's no link between "let two consenting adults marry regardless of gender" and "let animals sign legal contracts of any sort."

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    If you note, and in words that I used earlier, it is in the states' interests to "promote and regulate". That is established legal basis.
    Intermediate scrutiny requires that a particular method of discrimination serve an important state interest, and be directed at furthering that interest. Same-sex marriage bans do not further this interest in promoting and regulating procreation, therefore are not an argument relevant to same-sex marriage bans.
    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.

  7. #137
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,813

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    Slippery slope arguments often have a lot of predictive power. Who would have guessed that we would slide down into taking gay marriage seriously except those who have pointed to the decline in traditional values overall?

    Victims are irrelevant as far as the definition of marriage is concerned. But then liberals often claim that people offended by what others say are thereby victims, so why not people who are offended by gay marriage?

    Funny to see people claiming that opinions are irrelevant in a debate forum.
    Why are victims irrelevant? If you can't articulate any harm whatsoever done to people by allowing same-sex marriage, doesn't that drastically weaken the argument for banning it? You keep talking about a decline in values, definition changes, etc, but can you quantify any actual negative impact of any sort?
    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.

  8. #138
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
    I don't have a lot of faith that SCOTUS will knock down prop 8 because they are too concerned about political climate. What I don't understand is how prop 8 can pass the Equal Protection smell test in this country. If we acknowledge that gay people are equal citizens in today's world, then SSM is not creating a new right but rather extending an existing one.

    The answer should be obvious, but America has become upside down backwards land as of late so I can't expect the courts to make a sane ruling.
    I am going to take issue with you here. I think that many of the arguments against are that marriage is not a "right", but rather an extension of privileges that meet certain prerequisites. Which then makes it a question of prerequisites.

    Let us not lose sight of the fact than 9 states allow SSM with full privileges. Meaning that it is conceivable that this is not a Constitutional issue. Would not be the first instance of varying privileges between states.

  9. #139
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,813

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    I am going to take issue with you here. I think that many of the arguments against are that marriage is not a "right", but rather an extension of privileges that meet certain prerequisites. Which then makes it a question of prerequisites.

    Let us not lose sight of the fact than 9 states allow SSM with full privileges. Meaning that it is conceivable that this is not a Constitutional issue. Would not be the first instance of varying privileges between states.
    Supreme Court precedent clearly states that marriage is a "basic civil right." One so well-protected that it cannot even be denied to prisoners. (who through due process of law have lost any number of civil rights)
    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. #140
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:53 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,328
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 5 possible outcomes of the Supreme Court Prop. 8 case

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    Slippery slope arguments often have a lot of predictive power. Who would have guessed that we would slide down into taking gay marriage seriously except those who have pointed to the decline in traditional values overall?

    Victims are irrelevant as far as the definition of marriage is concerned. But then liberals often claim that people offended by what others say are thereby victims, so why not people who are offended by gay marriage?

    Funny to see people claiming that opinions are irrelevant in a debate forum.
    No, victims are a clear distinguishing point. Animals and minors cannot consent, and so are victims. No one is a victim in a SSM. You have no right to not be offended, nor will I ever make any argument otherwise, so you can pack that straw man away. Your opinions are irrelevant in regards to the law.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

Page 14 of 36 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... 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
  •