Page 70 of 159 FirstFirst ... 2060686970717280120 ... LastLast
Results 691 to 700 of 1585

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

  1. #691
    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 Trip View Post

    They also do not form family units with their own children born of that relationship, but rather the children are only the result of severed social and biological ties, hence a harm to society.
    Yeah orphans is a much better option

  2. #692
    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: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Trip View Post
    They not only were done away with, but were outlawed, often under penalty of death.

    They were not universally normalized by the Romans, but it was only recognized among a select few, along with the abandonment of Republican principles, the dissolution of the rule of law, and the creation of the deified Caesars, and this was right before the collapse of the Roman empire.
    I hate to break it to you, but you are factually, objectively incorrect.

    To begin with, Roman marriages included homosexual couplings as early as 120 B.C - a century and a half before the declaration of Empire by Augustus. We have among the written records of this era a certificate of marriage between one Lucius Dextrus, a Roman envoy in Carthage, and his manservant Homer (ref. Sailing The Wine Dark Sea).

    Moreover, it's factually incorrect to claim the Empire became more tolerant of homosexuality, rather than less, particularly after the imposition of Christianity upon the Empire. The death penalty had never applied to homosexuals until the Edict of Milan.

  3. #693
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Trip View Post
    The reference to 'diseased root" is not calling homosexuality a disease!

    And while Homosexuals have made 'massive positive contributions to society", these contributions have not come as a result of them being homosexuals, which is the context of the discussion and Society's vested interest in heterosexual marriage.

    They also do not form family units with their own children born of that relationship, but rather the children are only the result of severed social and biological ties, hence a harm to society.
    Wow, not only are children born out of wedlock a "harm to society", but so is the adoption of said children?
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  4. #694
    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 Gimmesometruth View Post
    Wow, not only are children born out of wedlock a "harm to society", but so is the adoption of said children?
    Doom gloom the sky is falling!

  5. #695
    Educator
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Brookfield,Wisconsin
    Last Seen
    11-04-13 @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    628

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

    Finally. Now Lindsey Graham and John McCain can get married! Likewise for Barack and Reggie Love.

  6. #696
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

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

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Doom gloom the sky is falling!
    I'm still confused on what the connection is between unwed mothers and gay marriage?
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  7. #697
    Professor
    afr0byte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    A blue state
    Last Seen
    09-12-13 @ 10:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    2,364

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    You're arguing against a strawman, as I never once said the nature of homosexuality is grounds for disallowing SS marriage.

    The grounds for disallowing SS marriage is that it violates definitive propriety of terms, as an SS couple is simply not "a man and a woman as husband and wife", which is what a "marriage" is and has been for over 12,000 years since the argicultural revolution, isolated tiny pockets of violation notwithstanding and, of course, invalid and powerless in their ability to redefine "marriage" any more than unjustified homicides gotten away with by the mafia or horrific governments had the power to broaden redefine "murder", obviously.

    Any decision regarding DOMA will be rightly decided solely on states v. federal, not on whether DOMA violates equal protection.

    Any decision on Prop 8 will be rightly decided based upon the actual arguments brought before the court, and Prop 8 argument was strangely strained, not at all an appeal to historic reality of definitive propriety of terms, so again, whatever the court decides here will not at all be a statement of SS couples should be allowed "marriage".

    SS couples do deserve equal protection in their civil union domestic partnerships.

    They just can't rightly call them "marriages".

    I suggest the win-win term homarriage for them.

    Most people support equal protection for them, just not the ridiculous oxymoronic use of the term "marriage", obviously and understandably.

    Create homarriage civil union domestic partnerships for SS couples and everyone wins.
    I guess it sucks for you that definitions can change.

  8. #698
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,280
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Ah yes!

    Nothing like waking up to the disgruntled nonsense of the American extremist far right.

    It's going to be a great morning.

    Freedom and justice has prevailed... On to prop 8!!!!

  9. #699
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,550
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    This decision does not strike that part of DOMA down and that part of DOMA is not unconstitutional. If Ohio does not (and it does not) want to recognize same-sex couples as married, it should not be required by the federal government to do so. That would merely be a back-door (no pun intended) to gay marriage in all 50 states and would further create the precedent that once the first state allows incest marriage (which is actually being debated as something that should be done in some circles) then all states would have to recognize that, too.
    Yes, I've noticed (and avoided) the "incest issue" in here. I doubt I'll be seeing a big push for that here in the states during my life-time, although I guess anything is possible.

    However, I haven't had a chance to completely read the actual decision so I can't comment with certainty. But I believe what I did read cited the Equal Protection clause and I assumed it referred not only to Federal benefits but the whole acceptance of marital rights awarded by another state even if same-sex marriage itself did not exist in the state the couple moved to. When I get a chance I'll read the whole decision and find out what is really what.

  10. #700
    Spectemur Agendo Trip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    02-01-14 @ 07:20 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,920

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

    National Journal writes of Scalia's dissent:

    In another seperate dissent, Justice Samuel Alito argues that the federal government did not violate the Constitution by defining marriage. "It leaves the choice to the people, acting through their elected representatives at both the federal and state levels," he writes. Taking a strict view of the Constitution, he continues, "the Constitution does not guarantee the right to enter into a same-sex marriage. Indeed, no provision of the Constitution speaks to the issue."


    Alito also writes that the issue of same-sex marriage is so new to the country, there is no knowing of the broader implications of allowing such an institution, citing the "ancient and universal human institution" of family." The justice made a similiar point during oral arguments for the case in March.


    "At present, no one—including social scientists, philosophers, and historians—can predict with any certainty what the long-term ramifications of widespread acceptance of same-sex marriage will be. And judges are certainly not equipped to make such an assessment."

    In 1794 Samuel Williams wrote The Natural and Civil History of Vermont, and JSTOR author Ralph N Miller writes of its importance, indicating "Its superiority consists in Williams largely successful attempt to arrive at an understanding of the cirumstances and of the historical forces which made Vermont and the other AMerican states, the amazingly effective social organisms they were" which is "tempered by Williams' acceptance of ... the significance of Nature to the student of all human affairs."

    Williams wrote in History of Vermont:

    It is not necessary to enumerate the many advantages, that arise from this custom of early marriages. They comprehend all the society can receive from this source; from the preservation, and increase of the human race. Every thing useful and beneficial to man, seems to be connected with obedience to the laws of his nature, the inclinations, the duties, and the happiness of individuals, resolve themselves into customs and habits, favourable, in the highest degree, to society. In no case is this more apparent, than in the customs of nations respecting marriage.

    Undeniably marriage was recognized even then, as a result of its importance in the preservation and increase of the human race - procreation. However at this point we have disregarded the relevance of human nature to society, so as to advance a corrupt social engineering based on entitlement, rather than that nature and benefit to society itself, to result in our own destruction.

    "If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary."

    ~ James Madison

Posting Permissions

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