Page 1 of 25 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 244

Thread: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va [W: 86,235]

  1. #1
    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

    Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va [W: 86,235]

    Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va.’s ban on same-sex marriage - The Washington Post

    Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va.’s ban on same-sex marriage

    A national gay rights organization sued the state of West Virginia over its ban on same-sex marriages Tuesday, declaring its Defense of Marriage Act a violation of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

    New York-based Lambda Legal filed the complaint in U.S. District Court in Huntington on behalf of three same-sex couples and the child of one couple. It filed a similar lawsuit last month challenging Virginia’s ban on gay marriages.

    In the West Virginia case, Lambda Legal argues the state’s ban unfairly discriminates against same-sex couples and their children. The organization says its clients are denied the legal sanction, societal respect, financial protections and other support that marriage gives to heterosexual couples.
    The group also contends the law violates constitutionally guaranteed rights to equal protection under the law and sends a message that gay men, lesbians and their children are second-class citizens “without any compelling, important or even legitimate justification.”
    back up link: National gay rights group to file W.Va. lawsuit* - News - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports -

    the battle for equality is afoot, cant go a couple days without equality fights popping up.

    so lets reflect, as far as i know

    PA, NJ, HI, Va(just today also link below), NM and now WV are some of the states in line with lawsuits pending, soon to be filed. or legislation/rulings in the works.

    Prop. 8 legal team joins fight against Virginia's gay marriage ban - latimes.com
    Lawsuit gets boost to fight gay marriage ban in Virginia - Washington Times

    The fall of DOMA started the ball rolling faster than expected and once again its the BANS that are going to HELP equality win. Sweet irony
    Last edited by AGENT J; 10-01-13 at 06:53 PM.
    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

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    I figured it would be the case. Now the pro-gay rights people need to recognize a few of these are going to fail before biased partisan judges. Eventually the supreme court will have tio make a true decision on this, and they have already showed that equality is more important than allowing people to vote other's rights away. I would have to say the courts were goiong to be the only place that would have done it for the whole US anyway considering how backwards the majority is in some states.

  3. #3
    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: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    I figured it would be the case. Now the pro-gay rights people need to recognize a few of these are going to fail before biased partisan judges. Eventually the supreme court will have tio make a true decision on this, and they have already showed that equality is more important than allowing people to vote other's rights away. I would have to say the courts were going to be the only place that would have done it for the whole US anyway considering how backwards the majority is in some states.
    well of course some of them are going to fail, i actually expect maybe even a 50/50 in district courts to fail but when it comes to SSCs and SCOTUS it will be different.

    Yep its going to be case after case after case reaching SSCs until its directly handled by SCOTUS and with the fall of DOMA, other SSCs already ruling on this and all the laws, state constitutions and ordinances out there about equality and discrimination the notch is already cut in the tree of discrimination. Equality is going to push down and we all will hear it fall.

    It blows my mind that in 2013 so many just want to piss all over the rights of others, discriminate against them and deny them equality.
    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

  4. #4
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,951

    Re: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    I figured it would be the case. Now the pro-gay rights people need to recognize a few of these are going to fail before biased partisan judges. Eventually the supreme court will have tio make a true decision on this, and they have already showed that equality is more important than allowing people to vote other's rights away. I would have to say the courts were goiong to be the only place that would have done it for the whole US anyway considering how backwards the majority is in some states.
    There may also be some cases that do pass because of pro-gay activist judges as well that are so deranged in their hateful stance on "equality" that they would reverse the legal will of the people and impose their own inappropriate view of marriage upon a state using their status as a judge to unfairly impose their will upon the people.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  5. #5
    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: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    There may also be some cases that do pass because of pro-gay activist judges as well that are so deranged in their hateful stance on "equality" that they would reverse the legal will of the people and impose their own inappropriate view of marriage upon a state.
    always funny to read deranged, hateful and equality in the same sentence, VERY telling.
    its not a legal will if its found to be discriminatory and violate equality, sorry. SO the only factual thing being imposed in THAT case would be equality. Makes me proud discrimination is losing and that equality and human rights is winning.

    You will still be free to think, feel, preach what ever you like, just like people think, feel, preach that minorities are a lesser, women are a lesser, interracial marriage is real marriage etc etc. All those inequalities lost just like this one will. Its only a matter of time, id say 5 years max, after that those that dont like equality can move to russia.
    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

  6. #6
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,951

    Re: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    always funny to read deranged, hateful and equality in the same sentence, VERY telling.
    its not a legal will if its found to be discriminatory and violate equality, sorry. SO the only factual thing being imposed in THAT case would be equality. Makes me proud discrimination is losing and that equality and human rights is winning.

    You will still be free to think, feel, preach what ever you like, just like people think, feel, preach that minorities are a lesser, women are a lesser, interracial marriage is real marriage etc etc. All those inequalities lost just like this one will. Its only a matter of time, id say 5 years max, after that those that dont like equality can move to russia.
    Just saying, there are some on the pro-SSM side that are literally deranged in their thinking, toss out grand judgments about their opposition and would violate the rights of states and voters to push their view of "equality" upon everyone. What I think is telling is when people think those who disagree shouldn't be allowed to have a vote or legal voice, especially considering that traditional marriage is the legal default and has been for hundreds of years with the issue of SSM being a change in policy instead of some new epiphany on "equality" that needs legal action with laws as written today.

    SSM is not like interacial marriage, that's a very very weak straw-man and slander tactic that is constantly tossed aorund in these threads. Let me know when sexuality is specifically mentioned in the Constitution as protected like race is (and don't try and use the fallacy that it's illegal gender discrimination to ban SSM). It's special interests that largely push these bans and violate the established law and default law of traditional marriage. I would say what Russia is doing is far more similar to what many on the pro-SSM side wants with using the government to chip away the rights and laws of dissenting individuals when they essentially argue that people have no right to vote on their views regarding marriage and that now, given some kind of social epiphany, SSM must be a default rule of law without a Constitutional amendment when traditional marriage has been default and legal for hundreds of years.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    There may also be some cases that do pass because of pro-gay activist judges as well that are so deranged in their hateful stance on "equality" that they would reverse the legal will of the people and impose their own inappropriate view of marriage upon a state using their status as a judge to unfairly impose their will upon the people.
    If you think equality is the work of a deranged activist judge then you probably think discrimination and prejudice are rights that come with no consequences. It is odd that you would expect things like fairness and equality in a system that promotes prejudice and inequality, but maybe the problem in your case is not within other people, but rather within yourself?

  8. #8
    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: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    1.)Just saying, there are some on the pro-SSM side that are literally deranged in their thinking
    2.) toss out grand judgments about their opposition and would violate the rights of states and voters to push their view of "equality" upon everyone.
    3.) What I think is telling is when people think those who disagree shouldn't be allowed to have a vote or legal voice
    4.) especially considering that traditional marriage is the legal default and has been for hundreds of years with the issue of SSM being a change in policy
    5.) instead of some new epiphany on "equality" that needs legal action with laws as written today.
    6.)SSM is not like interracial marriage, that's a very very weak straw-man and slander tactic that is constantly tossed around in these threads.
    7.)Let me know when sexuality is specifically mentioned in the Constitution as protected like race is (and don't try and use the fallacy that it's illegal gender discrimination to ban SSM).
    8.) It's special interests
    9.)that largely push these bans and violate the established law and default law of traditional marriage.
    1.) well this i agree with there are some on EVERY side that are deranged in their thinking.
    2.) well good thing this isnt happening. No rights of states are being violated.
    3.) well i dont see anybody doing that in general so again thats a nice story. You can vote on anything you want but you cant vote agaisnt rights and if you do and thats found to be the case of course its overturned. Thats how it works. ALso you can "speak" on anythign you like
    4.) this is just silly what was the default of slavery and womens rights and minorities rights, this will ALWAYS be a huge failure and there will never be and unbiased logic to support such an inane discriminatory any human rights and equality stance. Its meaningless.
    5.) nothing NEW about it, its always been discriminatory and not equality, it was just more accepted before
    6.) no matter how many times you say its not to feel better about your stance it is. FACTS, court cases, precedence, laws and ordinances already prove this and labeling it a straw man is just a desperate deflection. Its actually so solid in so many ways you are forced to claim it different because of how thoroughly it exposes the opposition.
    7.) doesnt have to be to be discrimination, was BLACK listed in the constitution before hand? how about handicapped? stop with the silliness thats the only factual straw man around here. Sorry reality is unappealing to you but thats just the way it is.
    8.) nothign special about wanting equal rights protected
    9.) no law is being "violated", none, zero by establishing equal rights. Im sure some individual might violate law but granting equal rights violates ZERO laws.

    you paint such a good picture but it cant be backed up in reality. I see how people that are in favor of discrimination could ALMOST believe it to feel better about their stance but reality wont change for you or them.

    all your arguments (its not equality, it not civil rights, violates states rigghts, violates the will of the people etc etc) were used against minority/womens rights and interracial marriage before. Those arguments were asinine, dishonest and stupid then. They held no logic and were just masks for supporting discrimination, the same is true of them today.

    sorry digs equality is coming, after its established you can still be in favor of discrimination if you like
    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

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Just saying, there are some on the pro-SSM side that are literally deranged in their thinking, toss out grand judgments about their opposition and would violate the rights of states and voters to push their view of "equality" upon everyone.
    Push equality on everyone including those who want prejudice. I am actually OK with that when it comes to public things we all have to use and get along with. If it does not actually hurt you to do your own thing and stop caring about directing everyone else's life then I am pretty good with us saying no to the nannies even if they happen to be the majority.
    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    What I think is telling is when people think those who disagree shouldn't be allowed to have a vote or legal voice, especially considering that traditional marriage is the legal default and has been for hundreds of years with the issue of SSM being a change in policy instead of some new epiphany on "equality" that needs legal action with laws as written today.
    I don't see anyone telling the antis they cannot vote, just that we are not going to consider screwing up someone else because they want to. We could have a vote that says everyone should be able to kick you in the crotch, and even though many people might actually want to kick you in the crotch I would be against it. I certainly would hope the courts would be also even if 99 percent of the people voted to be able to kick you in the crotch. If we wanted to outlaw people thinking about kicking you in the crotch, or talking about how much fun it would be to actually kick you in the crotch and fantasizing about it, or even making a doll of you and kicking it in the crotch for fun I would not outlaw that. As long as they are not doing it in front of you in places you have to be like work I am pretty Ok with them doing all of that as long as they do not hurt you. if they do it in certain places where they need to get along with you I can see even that idea being disturbing enough to damage you personally and that they should take their hate to a more private location.
    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    SSM is not like interacial marriage, that's a very very weak straw-man and slander tactic that is constantly tossed aorund in these threads. Let me know when sexuality is specifically mentioned in the Constitution as protected like race is (and don't try and use the fallacy that it's illegal gender discrimination to ban SSM). It's special interests that largely push these bans and violate the established law and default law of traditional marriage. I would say what Russia is doing is far more similar to what many on the pro-SSM side wants with using the government to chip away the rights and laws of dissenting individuals when they essentially argue that people have no right to vote on their views regarding marriage and that now, given some kind of social epiphany, SSM must be a default rule of law without a Constitutional amendment when traditional marriage has been default and legal for hundreds of years.
    the constitution was not all perfect or all inclusive and was made to adapt because even it's founders realized things may have to be added as society changed. So that argument that it should remain the same is wrong on all levels.

  10. #10
    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: Gay rights organization files federal lawsuit challenging W.Va

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    If you think equality is the work of a deranged activist judge then you probably think discrimination and prejudice are rights that come with no consequences. It is odd that you would expect things like fairness and equality in a system that promotes prejudice and inequality, but maybe the problem in your case is not within other people, but rather within yourself?
    you have to understand, for some people, its only EQUAL RIGHTS if they say so or they like it, otherwise its not. Just like minority rights, womens rights and interracial marriage. All the same failed arguments.
    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

Page 1 of 25 12311 ... 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
  •