Page 35 of 152 FirstFirst ... 2533343536374585135 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 1516

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

  1. #341
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Where do you get these "protected classes" of citizens? Can you share a source for this? I always thought that all were due equal protection of the law and due process.

    Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Protected class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  2. #342
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

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

    Quote Originally Posted by brothern View Post
    This was just posted on Reddit, and its pretty applicable to the 'freedom' mantra of being able to reject people and pass laws against them. Just substitute "gay," "muslim" or whatever you want with the word "Christian":


    "I have no problem with you being a Christian, but don't teach it in schools, or to my children. It's not being Christian that's wrong, it's the act that's wrong. The act of going to Church -- the act of praying. I have no problem with you being Christian, but do it in your home and keep it there. It's unnatural you see. No one is born Christian, you have to develop those beliefs, and it's a choice to act on Christian beliefs, such as going to Church or praying.

    And your religion shouldn't be legally recognized as a religion, because that would force me to accept Christianity as legitimate, and that would degrade my religion. So I'm going to fight for Traditional religion with a capital "T". If you want to have Christianity legally recognized and to get tax exempt status, then you would be stepping on my religious freedoms. I shouldn't have to recognize your religion as legitimate.

    Just to reiterate: I have no problem with Christians. Just the act of being Christian. I love Christians! You can be Christian all you want, just leave it at the home and don't talk about it to my children or bring it into society. Christianity shouldn't be legally recognized because that would force me to recognize it as legitimate, which I don't. I don't want to have to recognize it as equal under the protection of the law to my own religion. Freedom means people have the right to reject how other people live their lives.
    "
    It starts with going to church, and then it morphs on out from there - bestiality, sleeping around with children. They commit indecent acts with one another. And they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. They're full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant God haters. They are heartless. They are faithless. They are senseless. They are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil.

    Why do they murder and why do they hate us? Because all of them ... centuries of history, they all want to conquer the world, they all rejected God and they're all famous for murder.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  3. #343
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    The difference of course is that Christianity is good whereas sodomy is bad.
    You sure you're in the right religion? You seem more Old Testament.

  4. #344
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Where do you get these "protected classes" of citizens? Can you share a source for this? I always thought that all were due equal protection of the law and due process.

    Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    If you want to argue that you've a constitutional right to to buy booze on sunday i'm all for that (i would argue 1st amendment though). The fact it's not sold in your area currently is no reason to deny equal protection to gays though.

  5. #345
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    The difference of course is that Christianity is good whereas sodomy is bad.
    LOL what a legally solid argument that is. Don't knock it till you tried it and all. Anyway, know who takes part in the most sodomy? Hetero couples. Guess we better ban hetero marriage.

  6. #346
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Do you have the name of the 1978 case? I've been able to find only a vague reference to it that suggests that it was anything but definitive. Lawrence v Texas doesn't mention such a case. My guess is that the court did not rule on the constitutionality of such laws at all in the 1978 case.



    I think you're just doing it wrong.
    Bowers v Hardwick. It was 1986 however.

    "In overruling Bowers v. Hardwick, the Court stated that "Bowers was not correct when it was decided, and it is not correct today."

    Georgia itself struck down its own law that this case was based on, before lawrence v texas. What this guy is whining about affected only a few states, of a law seldom enforced, that has virtually no support in 2013. He's therefore taking an extremist position.
    Last edited by chromium; 12-25-13 at 02:27 AM.

  7. #347
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Republicans are most certainly left-wing so I am not sure what you are attempting to say.
    Trying to decide whether you're a POE or a RINO

  8. #348
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

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

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    Bowers v Hardwick. It was 1986 however.

    "In overruling Bowers v. Hardwick, the Court stated that "Bowers was not correct when it was decided, and it is not correct today."

    Georgia itself struck down its own law that this case was based on, before lawrence v texas. What this guy is whining about affected only a few states, of a law seldom enforced, that has virtually no support in 2013. He's therefore taking an extremist position.
    Wow, what an astoundingly hollow opinion. It amounts to little more than "nuh uh!" against the appeals court. It doesn't even do constitutional analysis, and misrepresents most of the precedents it cites. I'm not really surprised that Lawrence didn't address this case. It's kind of embarrassing.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  9. #349
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    LOL what a legally solid argument that is. Don't knock it till you tried it and all. Anyway, know who takes part in the most sodomy? Hetero couples. Guess we better ban hetero marriage.
    If you want to argue that Christianity and sodomy are equivalent then by all means please do so, but don't just act as though it's so obvious that you don't need to argue about it, or if you do act as though it's so obvious then don't get upset when your argument is dismissed out of hand by those who disagree with your premises. Even though some heterosexual couples engage in sodomy, sodomy is not inherent in a heterosexual marriage.

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    He's therefore taking an extremist position.
    Actually I think that my position is supported by around 20% or so of Americans, not that the number of people who support a proposition is what makes it right or wrong.

  10. #350
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    If you want to argue that Christianity and sodomy are equivalent then by all means please do so, but don't just act as though it's so obvious that you don't need to argue about it, or if you do act as though it's so obvious then don't get upset when your argument is dismissed out of hand by those who disagree with your premises. Even though some heterosexual couples engage in sodomy, sodomy is not inherent in a heterosexual marriage.
    If by equivalent you mean compatible, i don't think it's obvious. I think the biblical jesus never mentioned the subject, was supposedly a virgin, and had 12 dudes follow him around everywhere. Draw from that what you will. And man, you realize sodomy refers to oral sex too? You want to lock up like 98% of the country? You may as well say sodomy isn't inherent in gay marriage either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    Actually I think that my position is supported by around 20% or so of Americans, not that the number of people who support a proposition is what makes it right or wrong.
    You're right. It's that plus arguing for the gestapo to barge into bedrooms in the middle of sex act and drag someone away in handcuffs. That's what happened to Hardwick and Lawrence (though seemingly never to hetero couples). What would be your proposed punishment, send them off to concentration camp? You really should learn this concept called "live and let live."

Posting Permissions

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