Page 85 of 112 FirstFirst ... 3575838485868795 ... LastLast
Results 841 to 850 of 1111

Thread: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

  1. #841
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    Wrong!

    The court stated CLEARLY that their basic right to marry could not be denied by Virginia. The court DID NOT give them any kind of "permission".

    Stop with the horrible, imprecise, language.
    In this case, I think the imprecise language was the assignation of the word "right" to marriage. No right requires action by anyone else and by calling marriage a "right", the actual definition of "right" becomes suddenly quite nebulous when it should be quite clear.
    Fundamental rights:

    Right to self-determination[1]
    Right to liberty[2]
    Right to due process of law[2]
    Right to freedom of movement[3]
    Right to freedom of thought[4]
    Right to freedom of religion[4]
    Right to freedom of expression[5]
    Right to peaceably assemble[6]
    Right to freedom of association[7]
    Right to marry[8]

    Of these "rights", only the last one deviates in that it requires consent from others. Consent from government. Consent from a partner. It is a square peg in a round hole as a "right".
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  2. #842
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Marriage is a right and it is not equal when I can enter into a legal contract with a woman and a woman can't with another woman.
    If it was a "right", you should be able to enter into marriage with anything you want and without any permission from the state. It doesn't work out that way, does it?
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  3. #843
    Sage

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

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    If it was a "right", you should be able to enter into marriage with anything you want and without any permission from the state. It doesn't work out that way, does it?
    No one asks "permission" from the State to get married.

  4. #844
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    They got permission to marry, not the "right" to marry. You don't a need license to exercise a right. Do you need a license to vote? Do you need a license to speak? Do you need a license to attend a church?

    Of course not. Those are rights.
    They got the right to marry. Look again. Equal protection of the laws is a right and the SCOTUS itself said that marriage is a right as well.

    The right to marry and the Constitution

    This goes into why a state cannot make a restriction on a driver's license or hunting license on the basis of sex/gender. Equal protection of the laws is a right guaranteed by the Constitution, even if the restriction is on something regulated by a license.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  5. #845
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    In this case, I think the imprecise language was the assignation of the word "right" to marriage. No right requires action by anyone else and by calling marriage a "right", the actual definition of "right" becomes suddenly quite nebulous when it should be quite clear.
    Fundamental rights:

    Right to self-determination[1]
    Right to liberty[2]
    Right to due process of law[2]
    Right to freedom of movement[3]
    Right to freedom of thought[4]
    Right to freedom of religion[4]
    Right to freedom of expression[5]
    Right to peaceably assemble[6]
    Right to freedom of association[7]
    Right to marry[8]

    Of these "rights", only the last one deviates in that it requires consent from others. Consent from government. Consent from a partner. It is a square peg in a round hole as a "right".
    And you are wrong. You are trying to fit things into your beliefs which isn't how our laws work. Equal protection of the laws is a right, even if the law is regulated via a license.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  6. #846
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfsgirl View Post
    Maine Maryland and Washington state approved by voter referendum.
    I suppose you can get anything passed with enough money and political guilt/shaming. Added these were also very liberal states, and as early as 2009 voted exactly the opposite only to have their "state Legislatures pass it anyway". Then comes the referendum, and being outspent, shamed, guilt, and a feeling of utter hopelessness that your state government is going to do what it is going to do, I suppose people had other battles to fight that were more important.


    Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage - the leading group opposing same-sex marriage - said those favoring so-called traditional marriage had been outspent by a margin of at least 4 to 1.

    "Our opponents and some in the media will attempt to portray the election results as a changing point in how Americans view gay marriage, but that is not the case," Brown said in a statement. "Americans remain strongly in favor of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The election results reflect the political and funding advantages our opponents enjoyed in these very liberal states."

    In Massachusetts, Iowa and Connecticut, laws followed court rulings that same-sex couples could not be denied marriage rights. Legislatures approved the change in Vermont, New York and New Hampshire.

    Before this year, ballot initiatives banning the legal recognition of same-sex marriage had succeeded in 31 states, and no state had ever approved same-sex marriage by popular vote.

    Maine voters rejected gay marriage in a referendum in 2009 by 53 to 47 percent. In Washington and Maryland, where state legislatures previously passed laws expanding marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples, it was up to citizens to decide whether to let the laws stand.
    From your link! ^^^


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  7. #847
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    They got the right to marry. Look again. Equal protection of the laws is a right and the SCOTUS itself said that marriage is a right as well.

    The right to marry and the Constitution


    This goes into why a state cannot make a restriction on a driver's license or hunting license on the basis of sex/gender. Equal protection of the laws is a right guaranteed by the Constitution, even if the restriction is on something regulated by a license.
    The marriage laws of all states have no restriction based on your sex or gender. You have the same rights and restrictions in regard to marry that anyone else has. The state has ALWAYS been able to put reasonable restrictions on what constitutes a legal marriage. And 120+ years after Lincoln freed the slaves, the Supreme court decided that mixed race was no longer a reasonable restriction. So cheer up. 120+ years after sodomy has been decriminalized, the supreme court may well decide that bans on same sex marriages are no longer a reasonable restriction.

    At this point, they're quite reasonable. They may not be reasonable to YOU but they're certainly reasonable to the states that have them in place.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  8. #848
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    The marriage laws of all states have no restriction based on your sex or gender. You have the same rights and restrictions in regard to marry that anyone else has. The state has ALWAYS been able to put reasonable restrictions on what constitutes a legal marriage. And 120+ years after Lincoln freed the slaves, the Supreme court decided that mixed race was no longer a reasonable restriction. So cheer up. 120+ years after sodomy has been decriminalized, the supreme court may well decide that bans on same sex marriages are no longer a reasonable restriction.

    At this point, they're quite reasonable. They may not be reasonable to YOU but they're certainly reasonable to the states that have them in place.
    The marriage laws of most states have restrictions based on sex/gender. I cannot marry a woman only because of my gender/sex, just as Mr. Loving could not legally be married to Mrs. Loving only because of her race.

    Oh, it won't take that long for equality to come on this issue. It will be here much sooner.

    And no, those are not reasonable. They are discriminatory and further no legitimate state interest.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #849
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And you are wrong. You are trying to fit things into your beliefs which isn't how our laws work. Equal protection of the laws is a right, even if the law is regulated via a license.
    And equal protections are in place. A homosexual can get married in all 50 states and in no state is there a denial based on "homosexuality". You can't choose a same-sex partner, but neither can anyone else. You can't marry your brother. But neither can anyone else. The rights are equal.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  10. #850
    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: SCOTUS blog: DOMA Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    In this case, I think the imprecise language was the assignation of the word "right" to marriage. No right requires action by anyone else and by calling marriage a "right", the actual definition of "right" becomes suddenly quite nebulous when it should be quite clear.
    Fundamental rights:

    Right to self-determination[1]
    Right to liberty[2]
    Right to due process of law[2]
    Right to freedom of movement[3]
    Right to freedom of thought[4]
    Right to freedom of religion[4]
    Right to freedom of expression[5]
    Right to peaceably assemble[6]
    Right to freedom of association[7]
    Right to marry[8]

    Of these "rights", only the last one deviates in that it requires consent from others. Consent from government. Consent from a partner. It is a square peg in a round hole as a "right".
    Again, you are arguing from a position of ignorance, SCOTUS in Loving v Virginia stated that marriage is a basic, fundamental right THAT CANNOT BE DENIED BY THE STATE.

    A marriage licence is a LEGAL CONTRACT between two people that the state recognizes and protects. The consent is between the partners to abide by whatever agreement, religious or legal, they enter into.
    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.

Page 85 of 112 FirstFirst ... 3575838485868795 ... 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
  •