Page 47 of 152 FirstFirst ... 3745464748495797147 ... LastLast
Results 461 to 470 of 1516

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

  1. #461
    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 Deuce View Post
    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.
    They just need to point out that marriage was never defined as homosexual. That is a very new.

  2. #462
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,741

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    They just need to point out that marriage was never defined as homosexual. That is a very new.
    Proponents of same-sex marriage bans have pointed this out. But "it's tradition" is not sufficient justification to maintain a gender-based classification. The test is that the classification must serve an "important state interest" and that the measure is "substantially related" to that interest.

    "This is how it was before" is not an important state interest by any measure. That's why these arguments fail.
    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.

  3. #463
    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 Deuce View Post
    Proponents of same-sex marriage bans have pointed this out. But "it's tradition" is not sufficient justification to maintain a gender-based classification. The test is that the classification must serve an "important state interest" and that the measure is "substantially related" to that interest.

    "This is how it was before" is not an important state interest by any measure. That's why these arguments fail.
    Again, because rights are completely made up and can be created or destroyed with legislation or court orders, if the government does not see marriage as beyond what marriage is (heterosexual), they won't.

  4. #464
    Banned Morton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    So Cal
    Last Seen
    01-15-14 @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    344

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

    Whats the proper "end of sex" ?


    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    Because it, by it's very nature, is not conducive to the proper end of sex.

  5. #465
    Banned Morton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    So Cal
    Last Seen
    01-15-14 @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    344

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

    Tell that to the 9th amendment.


    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.

  6. #466
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,741

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Again, because rights are completely made up and can be created or destroyed with legislation or court orders, if the government does not see marriage as beyond what marriage is (heterosexual), they won't.
    Our current court system works how I described, based on more than a century's worth of case law. Yes, technically the government can take away any right they want through the use of force in violation of the constitution. While we're on hypotheticals, they could take away the right for women to vote. The Supreme Court might very well choose to completely ignore how the equal protection clause has functioned for the last century, but I don't expect they will and I don't see any reason to argue for 10 pages about your theoretical universe.
    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.

  7. #467
    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 Deuce View Post
    Yes, the government can take away any right
    Correct, because they can legally create and destroy rights as they see fit because rights are completely made up. And they can do this with the stroke of a pen, no violence required.

  8. #468
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,741

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Correct, because they can legally create and destroy rights as they see fit because rights are completely made up. And they can do this with the stroke of a pen, no violence required.
    Once again ignoring my post in favor of repeating yourself. Twice in one day. You're really fitting in here.
    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.

  9. #469
    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 Deuce View Post
    post
    If your post says "nu uh," I will take that as you asking me to do the same. Your wish was granted.

  10. #470
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Marriage didn't mean two gays until very recently, and it still doesn't federally.
    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).
    Notice I used the term "Civil Marriage" which means that the marriage was entered into in a jurisdiction where Same-sex Civil Marriage is legal.

    Your comment (quoted above) was that the Federal government doesn't recognize SSCM. That was incorrect, in United States v. Windsor Section 3 of DOMA was overturned so the Federal government does recognize SSCM from the States now. The State of residence of the couple is not a factor, the Federal government recognizes based on the State or origination (or DC, either one).



    >>>>

Posting Permissions

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