Page 8 of 40 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 394

Thread: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

  1. #71
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,936

    re: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits - First Read




    this is why the fall of DOMA will aid in getting equal rights nationalized.
    All its going to take now is some court cases here and there to pave the way.

    SO many scenarios can now push the issues and shine light on the fact this is inequality.

    The process will now be faster and soon all states will have to end their discrimination.
    Well, ignoring the inevitable and idiotic "discrimination against religious people" and "they're trying to change the definition!" non sequiturs, this seems reasonable. The legal limbo that resulted guarantees a case within the year, and for the Supreme Court to have to review it within at least three.

  2. #72
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    re: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by davidtaylorjr View Post
    1.)Ok since you are incapable of comprehending the statement let me restate it for you....

    2.) You said that because a court says something makes it more than just law, it makes it so.
    3.)What I take that to mean is that the court is always right.
    4.)That being said, if there were to come up a case where a court decided that we have the right to kill for any reason, aka murder, would you still hold that postion, or would you cry foul the court is wrong?
    1.) nice try but has me and others pointed out the problem was yours, you stated something that made no sense, so you failed again. mistake 1
    2.) nope i NEVER said that it makes it MORE than law but it does make it so. See this is exactly why you post failed how you come to the determination that makes it so means more than law is illogical. mistake 2
    3.) mistake 3
    4.) see the answers above, your nonsensical inane illogical conclusions and made up assumptions are false therefore you question makes no sense.

    if we were granted the right to kill for any reason the fact is it would no longer be murder
    i would not support that and would personally think its wrong
    but another fact would be we could kill for any reason and the law would make it so.

    thanks for pointing out where you made your mistakes and why we diidnt understand anything you said.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #73
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    re: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by davidtaylorjr View Post
    Because it isn't marriage.
    A little piece of paper (which ironically is your avatar) says you are wrong.
    <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>

  4. #74
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    re: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    1.)Well, ignoring the inevitable and idiotic "discrimination against religious people" and "they're trying to change the definition!" non sequiturs, this seems reasonable.
    2.) The legal limbo that resulted guarantees a case within the year, and for the Supreme Court to have to review it within at least three.
    1.) yes those failed arguments are quit idiotic
    2.) i agree it probably will be a year before the first cases happens and a review in three.

    i only wonder how many cases and if they will all be solid/big enough to force a sweeping rule or give them an ability to punt
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  5. #75
    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: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Sorry, but the fact that chickens don't have webbed feet and don't quack isn't a restriction against them being ducks. It's that they just aren't ducks. It neither held up nor failed in the SCOTUS because it wasn't about the state definition of marriage. It was about whether or not the federal government had the right to override the state definition.
    The legal definition of duck or chicken is based off of physical factors, including DNA among other things, that make that animal what it is. Such an analogy fails because marriage is not something with physical characteristics at all. Marriage is a concept. It is an abstract. You cannot compare an abstract to a physical/concrete thing.

    Marriage is defined in how it operates in the laws, not by what restrictions are placed on who can enter into marriage. You are still trying to use circular logic "it is that way because it is that way".
    "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. #76
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    re: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    There is equal rights, the people in states that voted and support SSM bans have every right to do so. SSM is not this over-hyped "equal rights" mantra that many want to push. It's a social issue that redefines legal marriage that people can support or not support and have those beliefs upheld in law.
    Do states have the right to define marriage as "only between fertile couples"...how about "only between people aged 18-40"? What if a state wants to define marriage as "only between people of the same religion". See how silly that is?
    <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>

  7. #77
    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: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    The legal definition of duck or chicken is based off of physical factors, including DNA among other things, that make that animal what it is. Such an analogy fails because marriage is not something with physical characteristics at all.
    Marriage, as defined in most states, does have a physical characteristic. It is one man and one woman joining together under state sanction.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  8. #78
    Sage davidtaylorjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    10-18-13 @ 08:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    6,775

    re: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.) nice try but has me and others pointed out the problem was yours, you stated something that made no sense, so you failed again. mistake 1
    2.) nope i NEVER said that it makes it MORE than law but it does make it so. See this is exactly why you post failed how you come to the determination that makes it so means more than law is illogical. mistake 2
    3.) mistake 3
    4.) see the answers above, your nonsensical inane illogical conclusions and made up assumptions are false therefore you question makes no sense.

    if we were granted the right to kill for any reason the fact is it would no longer be murder
    i would not support that and would personally think its wrong
    but another fact would be we could kill for any reason and the law would make it so.

    thanks for pointing out where you made your mistakes and why we diidnt understand anything you said.
    No you are being bull headed, but thanks for actually answering the question. Good grief.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.

    Ronald Reagan

  9. #79
    Sage davidtaylorjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    10-18-13 @ 08:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    6,775

    re: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    A little piece of paper (which ironically is your avatar) says you are wrong.
    Actually it doesn't.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.

    Ronald Reagan

  10. #80
    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: After DOMA, gay couples still would not receive many federal benefits. [W:345]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Marriage, as defined in most states, does have a physical characteristic. It is one man and one woman joining together under state sanction.
    No it doesn't. You cannot touch marriage. You cannot smell or see or actually hear marriage. Marriage is an abstract. It is not defined by who is allowed to enter into it. It is defined in how it functions. That is why the "definition" of marriage as "two people of the same race" failed. That is why the DOMA definition of marriage as "a man and a woman" failed. Because that is not how marriage functions in law.
    "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.

Page 8 of 40 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... 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
  •