Page 53 of 152 FirstFirst ... 343515253545563103 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 1516

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

  1. #521
    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 scatt View Post
    Marriage is two opposite sex people.
    You keep saying that. but it just isn't true.

    There are states and countries where marriage is two people of the same gender. So your statement is wrong.

    You may want to qualify it. You may mean "my religion says it's opposite sex" or something like that.

    But factually, your statement is wrong, because there are many married couples right now where the couples are NOT opposite sex.

    And as Lakryte has pointed out over and over, marriage is a right. The Supreme Court has said that (see cases where prisoners have sued to be able to marry - marriage is a right). So the question is - can we deny this right to same-sex couples? is there any reason that society can forbid this right? is it going to hurt society if they get married? As even the people supporting Prop 8 admitted in the trial - SSM would be good for the kids, good for the couples, and more in line with our country's values than banning it. And these were the people who wanted to ban it!

    If there is no reason to withhold a right from someone, then we need to let them exercise that right.

    Let's take voting: In general, we say voting is a right. You cannot be stopped from voting. BUT - we have said that felons can't vote; that there is a benefit to society to not allowing them to vote from prison. Many states also ban ex-felons from voting. I don't agree with those restrictions on voting rights, but the courts have allowed those restrictions.

    So when SSM gets to the Supreme Court, the SC will need to decide if there is some reason to withhold the right to marry from SSM couples. At that point, I think the evidence will be overwhelming that allowing SSM does no harm, and the bans nationwide will be repealed. (Similar to what happened with interracial marriage laws).

  2. #522
    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 WorldWatcher View Post
    Not in 18 States and DC.





    OK, don't get a Civil Marriage license for about $35 dollars and when you find the person you want to spend your life with - just have a religious ceremony. Then spend thousands of dollars on lawyers and estate planners to achieve only a fraction of the things that others have for that simple government recognition.

    You are free not to have the state "intervene" in your marriage.


    >>>>
    EXACTLY! I was all for "I don't need the govt to legalize my relationship" ...until I realized health care for my partner and other financial benefits I would get from marrying. I got married. Twice.

  3. #523
    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 paddymcdougall View Post
    You keep saying that. but it just isn't true.

    There are states and countries where marriage is two people of the same gender. So your statement is wrong.

    You may want to qualify it. You may mean "my religion says it's opposite sex" or something like that.

    But factually, your statement is wrong, because there are many married couples right now where the couples are NOT opposite sex.

    And as Lakryte has pointed out over and over, marriage is a right. The Supreme Court has said that (see cases where prisoners have sued to be able to marry - marriage is a right). So the question is - can we deny this right to same-sex couples? is there any reason that society can forbid this right? is it going to hurt society if they get married? As even the people supporting Prop 8 admitted in the trial - SSM would be good for the kids, good for the couples, and more in line with our country's values than banning it. And these were the people who wanted to ban it!

    If there is no reason to withhold a right from someone, then we need to let them exercise that right.

    Let's take voting: In general, we say voting is a right. You cannot be stopped from voting. BUT - we have said that felons can't vote; that there is a benefit to society to not allowing them to vote from prison. Many states also ban ex-felons from voting. I don't agree with those restrictions on voting rights, but the courts have allowed those restrictions.

    So when SSM gets to the Supreme Court, the SC will need to decide if there is some reason to withhold the right to marry from SSM couples. At that point, I think the evidence will be overwhelming that allowing SSM does no harm, and the bans nationwide will be repealed. (Similar to what happened with interracial marriage laws).
    One state, or forty-nine has no bearing on a federal "right" to gay marriage.

    I am not religious.

    Marriage of two opposite sex people is, because that is the definition of marriage.

    Gay marriage will most likely be federal protected soon, sure.

  4. #524
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    A marriage contract makes numerous things like this automatic, without having to pay lawyers thousands of dollars to properly draw up a bunch of different contracts that may or may not be immediately recognized and followed by a hospital, business, or state.
    A private contract between mutual parties can cover numerous things just as a government contract can. If you want to force your will on third parties, then yes, a government contract is really the only way forward for you. If that is the case however, then frankly, I don't consider your desires of any merit.

  5. #525
    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 scatt View Post
    One state, or forty-nine has no bearing on a federal "right" to gay marriage.

    I am not religious.

    Marriage of two opposite sex people is, because that is the definition of marriage.

    Gay marriage will most likely be federal protected soon, sure.
    That's not what you said. You said "marriage is between opposite sex people". That's not true. Even the federal govt now recognizes it's not true (with the striking down of part of DOMA). You are the only one thinking the definition of marriage is still "opposite sex". You need to qualify it. In some states it is; in most religions it is; but in many states and many countries, it isn't.

    You seem to be really stubborn about that definition. Here you go -from Merriam Webster:
    Marriage - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
    mar·riage noun \ˈmer-ij, ˈma-rij\
    : the relationship that exists between a husband and a wife

    : a similar relationship between people of the same sex

    : a ceremony in which two people are married to each other
    Even THEY don't define it solely as opposite sex couples.

  6. #526
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:40 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,709

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

    Even THEY don't define it solely as opposite sex couples.
    check that same dictionary 10-20 years ago definition 2 won't be there.

  7. #527
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,128

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    check that same dictionary 10-20 years ago definition 2 won't be there.
    Go back to ancient Rome and you have two different emperors who were married to men. What is your point?
    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.

  8. #528
    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 ludin View Post
    check that same dictionary 10-20 years ago definition 2 won't be there.
    So? how is that relevant?

  9. #529
    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 paddymcdougall View Post
    You said "marriage is between opposite sex people". That's not true. Even the federal govt now recognizes it's not true (with the striking down of part of DOMA). You are the only one thinking the definition of marriage is still "opposite sex". You need to qualify it. In some states it is; in most religions it is; but in many states and many countries, it isn't.

    You seem to be really stubborn about that definition. Here you go -from Merriam Webster:
    Marriage - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

    Even THEY don't define it solely as opposite sex couples.
    But it is. The federal government only ended the lack of benefits for gay marriage if a state says they recognize the marriage, it in no way defines marriage as also gay marriage.

    When did they change it?

  10. #530
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,128

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    But it is. The federal government only ended the lack of benefits for gay marriage if a state says they recognize the marriage, it in no way defines marriage as also gay marriage.

    When did they change it?
    United States versus Windsor.
    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.

Posting Permissions

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