Page 44 of 152 FirstFirst ... 3442434445465494144 ... LastLast
Results 431 to 440 of 1516

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

  1. #431
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,774

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    Is it ordered by nature to procreation?
    Do you or do you not believe it should be illegal for the previously mentioned couple to have sex? Don't cop out with a redirection question. Man up and say what you believe.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  2. #432
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Not yet it isn't. The supreme court in the latest two gay marriage cases refused to address the constitutionality of states not allowing state recognition of gay marriage.
    Ahhhh - no. United States v. Windsor was about the Federal government discriminating. It presented no core question to the Court regarding whether States can or cannot restrict Civil Marriage based on gender.

    The Prop 8 Case? Yep the punted using the "standing" issue to dodge the question.

    So it's 1 case, not 2.


    Now, next year will they be able to dodge an appeal by Utah? Probably not since the Governor & AG will process such an appeal if they lose at the 10th Circuit.


    >>>>

  3. #433
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Not yet it isn't. The supreme court in the latest two gay marriage cases refused to address the constitutionality of states not allowing state recognition of gay marriage.
    Marriage is a right in all 50 states and the District of Colombia. The question is whether same-sex couples can be excluded from that right. As far as Utah is concerned, the answer was no by the Federal Court. At this moment, it marriage is a right that cannot be denied to same-sex couples in Utah. Thus it is accurate to say voters cannot vote away constitutional rights.

    Furthermore, the court does not have to rule on something for the right to be there--it is very possible that the right is simply being violated. In the states without legal same-sex marriage, the rights of same-sex couples are being violated, just as the rights of interracial couples were being violated before the court ruled so.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  4. #434
    Guru
    scatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 10:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,721

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    Marriage is a right in all 50 states and the District of Colombia. The question is whether same-sex couples can be excluded from that right. As far as Utah is concerned, the answer was no by the Federal Court. At this moment, it marriage is a right that cannot be denied to same-sex couples in Utah. Thus it is accurate to say voters cannot vote away constitutional rights.

    Furthermore, the court does not have to rule on something for the right to be there. In the states without legal same-sex marriage, the rights of same-sex couples are being violated, just as the rights of interracial couples were being violated before the court ruled so.
    Loving has not been applied to gay marriage by SCOTUS yet.

  5. #435
    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 Deuce View Post
    Do you or do you not believe it should be illegal for the previously mentioned couple to have sex? Don't cop out with a redirection question. Man up and say what you believe.
    No. I don't.

  6. #436
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Loving has not been applied to gay marriage by SCOTUS yet.
    That doesn't matter. We are talking about Utah. The voters of Utah do not get to vote away a constitutional right. The right existed before the court made a ruling. The court was simply pointing out a violation of that right, not creating a new one that did not previously exist.

    Constitutional rights exist regardless of whether or not governments follow them. Before Loving v. Virginia, interracial couples were having their rights violated, even though no court had ruled so yet.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  7. #437
    Guru
    scatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 10:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,721

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    That doesn't matter. We are talking about Utah. The voters of Utah do not get to vote away a constitutional right. The right existed before the court made a ruling. The court was simply pointing out a violation of that right, not creating a new one that did not previously exist.

    Constitutional rights exist regardless of whether or not governments follow them. Before Loving v. Virginia, interracial couples were having their rights violated, even though no court had ruled so yet.
    I am not talking about Utah, nor was I involved in a conversation specifically about Utah, nor do many people claim state laws are what makes "rights" in the US.

  8. #438
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    I am not talking about Utah, nor was I involved in a conversation specifically about Utah, nor do many people claim state laws are what makes "rights" in the US.
    This topic is about Utah, which is why I addressed both the argument as applied to Utah and the argument in general. I still addressed the argument in general. To reiterate for the third time: Constitutional rights exist regardless of whether or not governments follow them. Before Loving v. Virginia, interracial couples were having their rights violated, even though no court had ruled so yet.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  9. #439
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 04:17 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,032

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paddymcdougall
    Nature has decided our sex activity is not tied to procreation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    Uh huh.

    Not sure if you were agreeing with me or not?

    If nature intended us only to have sex when we can procreate, women would go into heat once a year, she would have sex with one or more men, and then be done with it.

    That obviously doesn't happen with the human animal. Nature has said that we can have sex whenever we like. So why shouldn't we? And any way we want it?

  10. #440
    Guru
    scatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 10:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,721

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    This topic is about Utah, which is why I addressed both the argument as applied to Utah and the argument in general. I still addressed the argument in general. To reiterate for the third time: Constitutional rights exist regardless of whether or not governments follow them. Before Loving v. Virginia, interracial couples were having their rights violated, even though no court had ruled so yet.
    "Rights" must first be acknowledged.

Posting Permissions

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