Page 152 of 152 FirstFirst ... 52102142150151152
Results 1,511 to 1,516 of 1516

Thread: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage[W:780]

  1. #1511
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by rhinefire View Post
    The phrase "same sex marriage" should be banned. Remove "sex" from this subject. I thought marriage was "commitment", not "sex".
    The term "Same Sex" refers to gender, not sex as in intercourse.

  2. #1512
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony60 View Post
    Yes, really insightful. Good grief. I just have to assume it is willful, though I don't want to underestimate the lack of IQ I've seen here lately. You know who you are.
    Meh, when I hear people begin making partisan ramblings I lose any interest in taking them seriously.

    However, I give you credit for using something resembling a categorical imperative. Unfortunately your argument turns marriage into nothing more than a union for sexual regulation whereas I and others view it as a duty that unifies two wills. To deny marriage to same sex couples is to deny dignity and freedom for individuals to live their lives in the way they see fit. You feel justified in this denial because of your personal views on restricting marriage to partners theoretically capable of procreation despite the reality that same sex marriage can further the overall good of humanity be increasing unions of mutual respect and love.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  3. #1513
    Guru
    brothern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,177
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage[W:780]

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Nick View Post
    It appears the Feds have never heard of the Tenth Amendment.

    Our federal government believes they can do whatever the **** they want....

    We don't have a ****ing democracy - we have an authoritarian federal government...
    Both Prop 8 and DOMA were struck down on the rational that,

    (1) there was no rational basis or vested interest denying gays and lesbians marriage licenses, which violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses; or as the 9th Court put it, "Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California" and

    (2) "DOMA's principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal ... The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity."

    The Feds not recognizing Utah's same-sex couples would be just as unconstitutional and demeaning as DOMA and Prop 8.
    Help fight Zika, TB, HIV/AIDs and water pollution by donating your CPU's excess processing time to scientific research.
    A self-serving billionaire engaging in historically massive personal corruption #NotMyPresident

  4. #1514
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,937

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Nick View Post
    A passed law is valid until it is squashed/repealed (even while being challenged).

    Obamacare is a perfect example.
    Which would simply mean that a) the governor cannot void any of these marriages before the final decision is made by whatever highest court will make it, and b) there is still a valid case for a lawsuit since they were still legally allowed to marry. The law cannot void the marriages. They could refuse to recognize them should the state win the appeal (although it is unlikely they will), but not void them because the people did not break any laws in entering into the marriages.
    "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. #1515
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 07:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Which would simply mean that a) the governor cannot void any of these marriages before the final decision is made by whatever highest court will make it, and b) there is still a valid case for a lawsuit since they were still legally allowed to marry. The law cannot void the marriages. They could refuse to recognize them should the state win the appeal (although it is unlikely they will), but not void them because the people did not break any laws in entering into the marriages.

    Technically speaking I'm not quite sure I agree with this analysis. True the Governor can't "void" the Civil Marriages and true there will be lawsuits will not ultimately be determined until the SCOTUS rules on the case.

    IF the State wins the case, then the law will have been upheld from it's inception. That means those marriages would have been made at a time when such marriages were not authorized in the State. The State could then move to void the marriages as never having been legal in the first place. If they are voided then they wouldn't be

    On the other hand if Marriage Equality is upheld, then the law would have voided from it's inception meaning those marriages would remain valid.



    The status of the marriages isn't that cut and dried.


    >>>>

  6. #1516
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,937

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Technically speaking I'm not quite sure I agree with this analysis. True the Governor can't "void" the Civil Marriages and true there will be lawsuits will not ultimately be determined until the SCOTUS rules on the case.

    IF the State wins the case, then the law will have been upheld from it's inception. That means those marriages would have been made at a time when such marriages were not authorized in the State. The State could then move to void the marriages as never having been legal in the first place. If they are voided then they wouldn't be

    On the other hand if Marriage Equality is upheld, then the law would have voided from it's inception meaning those marriages would remain valid.



    The status of the marriages isn't that cut and dried.


    >>>>
    I think there would still be a valid case to be made in court against voiding the marriages. I think they would have a legitimate suit to having their marriages legal since they did nothing wrong when entering into the marriage, which is generally what is necessary to void a marriage. The problem is that this really hasn't been an issue before, because voiding marriages is almost always done based on a case of fraud, someone lying about their ability to enter into a marriage, not the state laws being so screwed up about marriage. They won't necessarily win such a case, but the lawsuit potential is still there because of the simply legal question of where is the state's legal right to void a marriage. Not to mention, there are likely to be at least some couples who were legally married in Utah and move to other states that recognize their marriage from Utah there. Can Utah void a same sex marriage that is being legally recognized by another state just due to laws that discriminate based on sex/gender? Would that other state have a legal right to sue Utah over their citizens' right to be married? It might not happen but the potential is there and they could even show standing, even if they didn't win the actual case.

    In all honesty, this is simply just another reason to ensure that the laws are simply struck down altogether because having them in place leads to further lawsuits, whether those initiating the lawsuits win or not, there is still money required to defend against them.
    "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.

Posting Permissions

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