Page 46 of 152 FirstFirst ... 3644454647485696146 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 1516

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

  1. #451
    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
    And SCOTUS has already addressed marriage, and the right to that as well. However, just as SCOTUS has not addressed whether denying the right to marriage to same-sex couples is constitutional, it has also not addressed whether denying the right to life to women with blonde hair is constitutional. Thus, by your own argument, if such a law were passed women with blonde hair do not have a right to live, and only when the court says the law is unconstitutional do they gain such a right.

    Rights exist before SCOTUS affirms their existence. If you deny such, you get absurd results. That is the piece of the puzzle you are missing.
    But not gay marriage.

  2. #452
    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
    But not gay marriage.
    Strawman. You are arguing in circles. There is no such thing as a right to "gay marriage" or "interracial marriage." The right to marriage exists, and same-sex couples are being denied that right. Either the basis for that denial is constitutional or it is not, but it is there nonetheless. Please address my actual arguments from this point forward.

    Furthermore, it is not necessary for the Supreme Court to rule on something for a violation of rights to exist. Again, I point to the example of denying someone the right to life on the basis of their hair color. The court has never ruled it is unconstitutional to pass such a law. That does not mean if such a law were passed suddenly blonde people have no right to life--it simply means their rights are being violated.
    Last edited by Lakryte; 12-28-13 at 04:33 PM.
    "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."

  3. #453
    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
    There is no such thing as a right to "gay marriage"

    The right to marriage exists, and same-sex couples are being denied that right. Either the basis for that denial is constitutional or it is not, but it is there nonetheless. Please address my actual arguments from this point forward.

    Furthermore, it is not necessary for the Supreme Court to rule on something for a violation of rights to exist. Again, I point to the example of denying someone the right to life on the basis of their hair color. The court has never ruled it is unconstitutional to pass such a law. That does not mean if such a law were passed suddenly blonde people have no right to life--it simply means their rights are being violated.
    Correct.

    Marriage didn't mean two gays until very recently, and it still doesn't federally.

    Since rights are completely subjective and rely entirely on the makeup of the current government, it absolutely does require it.

  4. #454
    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
    Correct.

    Marriage didn't mean two gays until very recently, and it still doesn't federally.

    Since rights are completely subjective and rely entirely on the makeup of the current government, it absolutely does require it.
    No. Government exists to protect rights, not create them. You have a right to life whether or not government exists. The only rights dependent on government are those such as voting that deal with it specifically.
    "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."

  5. #455
    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
    No. Government exists to protect rights, not create them. You have a right to life whether or not government exists. The only rights dependent on government are those such as voting that deal with it specifically.
    The state recognizing your marriage requires the state.

  6. #456
    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 scatt View Post
    Correct.

    Marriage didn't mean two gays until very recently, and it still doesn't federally.

    Since rights are completely subjective and rely entirely on the makeup of the current government, it absolutely does require it.


    Actually Civil Marriage applies to same-sex couples at the federal level. You may not have heard that DOMA Section 3 was struck as unconstitutional.



    >>>>

  7. #457
    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 WorldWatcher View Post
    Actually Civil Marriage applies to same-sex couples at the federal level. You may not have heard that DOMA Section 3 was struck as unconstitutional.
    If a state recognizes that marriage (most don't as of now, and SCOTUS certainly said nothing of them having to).

  8. #458
    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
    The state recognizing your marriage requires the state.
    And states that refuse to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples are violating their rights. Again, you are just going in circles.
    "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. #459
    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
    And states that refuse to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples are violating their rights.
    Except it is not a right yet.

  10. #460
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,844

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Except it is not a right yet.
    The burden is on the state to justify a gender-based classification when it is challenged under equal protection.

    They aren't able to provide that justification, which is why same-sex marriage bans are failing every court challenge. It's not a right recognized nationwide. But like you say, yet. It will happen.
    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.

Posting Permissions

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