Page 50 of 159 FirstFirst ... 40484950515260100150 ... LastLast
Results 491 to 500 of 1585

Thread: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

  1. #491
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:22 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,315
    Blog Entries
    2

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Court is issuing orders right now. They are expected to issue judgements at 10, and of course I am scheduled to go out at 10 so might be awhile finding anything out. Of interest from the orders is that Cert was ranted for NLRB V. NOEL CANNING, ET AL, which is the case involving the president making recess appointments when the senate is convening every three days in pro forma sessions.
    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.

  2. #492
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,783

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Court is issuing orders right now. They are expected to issue judgements at 10, and of course I am scheduled to go out at 10 so might be awhile finding anything out. Of interest from the orders is that Cert was ranted for NLRB V. NOEL CANNING, ET AL, which is the case involving the president making recess appointments when the senate is convening every three days in pro forma sessions.
    Nothing on DOMA, Prop 8, or VRA today. We did get a non-decision on affirmative action, though! More decisions tomorrow.

    Supreme Court blueballs!
    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.

  3. #493
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,775

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by AlabamaPaul View Post
    Is there any law stopping a gay from marrying?
    That's about as idiotic as saying "was there any law stopping a black person from marrying a black person?" Well, if you don't want to marry a black person, then yes, there absolutely was.
    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!

  4. #494
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    09-27-16 @ 12:59 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,189

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Demonstrating how SSM benefits children, relationships, people, and society is the winning argument.
    Actually, it is a losing proposition for children, people and society. To allow those who proclaim deviant behavior as benefiting society, while destroying the family unit would be a joke if it were not so serious and sad.

  5. #495
    Sage

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

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Texmex View Post
    Actually, it is a losing proposition for children, people and society. To allow those who proclaim deviant behavior as benefiting society, while destroying the family unit would be a joke if it were not so serious and sad.
    So having an avenue for gay people to form loving, lasting, stable relationships is bad for society? How so?

  6. #496
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    09-27-16 @ 12:59 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,189

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    So having an avenue for gay people to form loving, lasting, stable relationships is bad for society? How so?
    When you use the term gay people, I think you misuse the term. The proper term is sodomite. It is impossible for these people to offer any child a stable, loving environment since their entire lifestyle is based on a degenerate perversion of marriage, which was established by God and cannot be rightfully changed by an man.

  7. #497
    Sage

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

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Texmex View Post
    When you use the term gay people, I think you misuse the term. The proper term is sodomite. It is impossible for these people to offer any child a stable, loving environment since their entire lifestyle is based on a degenerate perversion of marriage, which was established by God and cannot be rightfully changed by an man.
    Reality differs from your veiwpoint on this subject.

  8. #498
    Guru

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    10-01-17 @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,498

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Respondent argues that it didn’t need a Green Acres tax exemption for the
    Pavilion; it could at any time have obtained the same benefit by applying for a tax
    exemption as a religious organization. Indeed, after these events that is exactly what it
    did. We are, however, bound by the facts that were, not those that might have been, or
    that came to pass in the aftermath of petitioners’ application. Respondent accepted a
    particular form of tax exemption that required it to keep the Pavilion open to the public
    1
    The term “place” can extend beyond fixed locations, but that discussion is unnecessary here.
    4OAL DKT. NO. CRT 6145-09
    on an equal basis, N.J.S.A. 54:4-3.64; N.J.A.C. 7:35-1.4. Neptune Township was
    skeptical that this could be achieved, but respondent persuaded the DEP and renewed
    that promise every three years. Thus, it not only interacted with government, it
    acknowledged the very thing that the interaction test seeks to assess.

    http://www.adfmedia.org/files/OGCMA-...pport=1#page=3
    Sigh, wade through all this and ask yourself: was there a violation of The NJ Methodist Church's first amendment rights?

  9. #499
    Guru

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    10-01-17 @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,498

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    So now you're comparing consentual gay sex with child rape? Ok, I see we won't be going anywhere productive.
    Or would you rather condone the rhetoric of the signature of the poster that's literally the biggest BS on this board (the font type has got to be at least 48 pt.)?

    The sig is rhetoric because gay marriage advocates don't care about equal justice for all. They do care about gay marriage, though. The signature is to the effect: fight for gay marriage, fight for equal justice for all.

    I'm rather sick of rhetoric from both radical sides. Two wrongs don't make a Wright. Well, unfortunately, sometimes they do.
    Last edited by cabse5; 06-24-13 at 02:39 PM.

  10. #500
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Ah. Yes, of course, I see it now. Thank you so much for the mountain of evidence presented.
    There is a mountain of evidence. There are decades of research on the subject of same sex couples. There's basically no difference in outcomes for the couple or their children. Nor is there any documented detrimental effect of same sex relationships on hetero ones. Since marriage in general and private sexual conduct are protected by strict scrutiny, gender discrimination is protected by intermediate scrutiny, and same sex conduct is protected by at least intermediate scrutiny, the burden is on opponents to show proof, not on supporters. By all means, show us all the evidence you have of what legitimate (or maybe compelling) interest is furthered by prohibiting SSM, and how prohibiting SSM furthers that interest.

    Quote Originally Posted by cabse5 View Post
    Or three people. Or one living person and one dead person in a couple. Or one human and one non-human in a couple. Marriage is a right, for all, ya know. And, according to the law, one can't define marriage.
    You don't really understand the concept of consent, do you? Of those three examples, only the first can have consent. You do know that both (or all) participants in a marriage have to consent, right? Dead people, animals, or whatever else cannot consent. We absolutely can define marriage. We just can't definite it so as to violate the constitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    First we'd have to try to figure out what important state interest was served by creating marriage as it exists. Then we would be able to ascertain whether or not redefining marriage to create the novel concept of "homosexual marriage" would further those goals. So why was state sanctioned marriage created in the first place?
    No, we don't. Once you get past rational basis, the burden is on the government to prove why it can/should restrict liberty. Not on the people to prove why they should have it. So no, we do not have to figure any of this out.

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Welfare pays more than an $8/hour job in 40 states, more than a $12/hour job in 7 states and more than the salary of a teacher in 9 states. That should give you some indication of the generousity of that welfare "lifestyle".
    And weirdly, you think that this is reason to lower welfare benefits, not pay people better for working. How bizarre.

    Quote Originally Posted by Texmex View Post
    When you use the term gay people, I think you misuse the term. The proper term is sodomite. It is impossible for these people to offer any child a stable, loving environment since their entire lifestyle is based on a degenerate perversion of marriage, which was established by God and cannot be rightfully changed by an man.
    But heterosexuals engaging in sodomy are just fine? Also what about lesbians? Why is always male anal sex that gets people so worked up?

    Quote Originally Posted by cabse5 View Post
    Or would you rather condone the rhetoric of the signature of the poster that's literally the biggest BS on this board (the font type has got to be at least 48 pt.)?

    The sig is rhetoric because gay marriage advocates don't care about equal justice for all. They do care about gay marriage, though. The signature is to the effect: fight for gay marriage, fight for equal justice for all.
    If you only look at it as justice for one of the people in the relationship, and frame it as "the right of a man to marry whoever he chooses", then yes, you could misunderstand the issue like that. Tell me, how is the child being raped obtaining equal justice?
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •