Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 111

Thread: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Won’ (

  1. #71
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    What do you think that Loving v. Virginia did? You are aware, are you not....the the SCOTUS makes laws all the time. Its called "Caselaw".
    You are aware the SCOTUS in Loving v. Virginia, ruled that STATES cannot pass laws that relate to race and marriage. The Federal Government has never had such laws on the books.

    I'd be careful being too snarky with your responses. Your comments are not serving you well.

  2. #72
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,803

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    I don't need to make a case for the word, voters and others have already done that. Why did the people of California vote to change the state Constitution to protect the definition of the word?
    Where did you get the idea that they passed Prop. 8 to protect the word? Clearly that's not the case. They did it to continue to discriminate against gay couples. Had they wanted to protect the word, they would have said "gay people can have the same legal rights as straight people, they just cannot call their union 'marriage'."

    There is example after example of people all across the country, religious and agnostic, who have made it very clear they want the meaning of the word "marriage" to remain the same as it has always been.
    You still haven't made a case for why we ought to invent another word for something that we already have a perfectly serviceable word in use for.

    I'm interested in the rights, and not the word.
    Yet that's all you talk about.
    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!

  3. #73
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

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

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    and it absolutely has. There is no question that gay marriage is going to be the law of the land, whether by Supreme Court ruling or at the ballot box. That is the cruxt of the article.
    GOING to be and WILL be are two entirely different things, when talking about the ballot box. The OP's story asserts that the mind of America is "made up" which suggests a PRESENT tense, not a future tense. Regardless of your personal opinions regarding the legitimacy of the campaign in california, the clear undisputable fact is that the majority of voters there voted to disallow gay marriage. That's fact. You can attempt to degrade that fact in any fashion you wish, but you can't actually CHANGE that fact. The reality is that over 26 states, meaning more than half the states in the nation, have statutes and or constitutional measures that ban same sex marriage. While general polls are showing a definitive uptick and majority over all that support it, POLLS don't make laws...voting does, and the voting record and reality does not paint anywhere near as clear cut of a reality as the OP's story is being made.

    I agree completely that if the courts don't mandate it we'll see a majority of states recognizing same sex marriage in the coming decades. Absolutely that will happen. But to claim that the American Public has "made up their mind" in favor of it today is a rather ridiculous premise given the reason the case is even able to be heard right now, the status in the majority of states, and the mixed record it has at the ballot box.

  4. #74
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    In other words, as we all already knew, you got squat.

    No surprise.
    No, but I don't see a need to even waste squat on some posters.

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by madman View Post
    Even IF the state mandated all married couples go though this counseling, what would be different today?
    A lower the divorce rate: Premarital counseling reduces divorce risk

    Before marrying, couples need to be in agreement on money, religion, kids and in-laws, as divorces most often come from conflict over one or more of those categories.

    It doesn't matter what their position on each category is, so long as they are in agreement. An atheist couple who values a high FICO score, never wants children and loves their in-laws, is just as viable as a Catholic couple who hate any kind of debt, want 2-3 children and can tolerate the in-laws for holidays.
    Last edited by Jerry; 03-28-13 at 02:45 PM.

  6. #76
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Where did you get the idea that they passed Prop. 8 to protect the word? Clearly that's not the case. They did it to continue to discriminate against gay couples. Had they wanted to protect the word, they would have said "gay people can have the same legal rights as straight people, they just cannot call their union 'marriage'."



    You still haven't made a case for why we ought to invent another word for something that we already have a perfectly serviceable word in use for.



    Yet that's all you talk about.



    Get informed, lose the absurd bias that appears to be blinding you, and then revisit the issue.

  7. #77
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,803

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    No, but I don't see a need to even waste squat on some posters.
    Yeah, the ones that show what a laughable position you hold.
    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!

  8. #78
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,803

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    Get informed, lose the absurd bias that appears to be blinding you, and then revisit the issue.
    Says the one with the absurd bias, who seems to be getting hot and bothered whenever someone points it out.
    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!

  9. #79
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    You are aware the SCOTUS in Loving v. Virginia, ruled that STATES cannot pass laws that relate to race and marriage. The Federal Government has never had such laws on the books.

    I'd be careful being too snarky with your responses. Your comments are not serving you well.
    Wow.....just shows how little you understand the SCOTUS and what "CASELAW" is. After Loving States cannot pass laws prohibiting inter-racial marriage. This is based on Federal caselaw...which is based on the US Constitution.
    <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>

  10. #80
    Professor
    madman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    So. California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,937

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Interesting. Thanks for the link.

    With divorce rate as high as it is, and with a majority of the country being religious, you would think it wouldn't work very well.

Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... 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
  •