Page 54 of 152 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664104 ... LastLast
Results 531 to 540 of 1516

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

  1. #531
    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 CriticalThought View Post
    United States versus Windsor.
    Merriam Webster changed it then? I doubt it.

  2. #532
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,122

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Merriam Webster changed it then? I doubt it.
    Merriam Webster changed it in March of 2009.
    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.

  3. #533
    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 View Post
    So? how is that relevant?
    went back to my 1983 Webster dictionary - 30 years ago. Won't do the whole thing - this is the full, 2,000+ page dictionary, unabridged, so it's a long definition. But some parts of it:

    Marriage:
    1. The state of being married; relation between husband and wife; married life; wedlock; matrimony
    2. the act of marrying; wedding
    3. the rite or form used in marrying
    4. any close or intimate union.

    Even back then, they don't specify opposite genders. "any close or intimate union".

    Now of course you'll say they didn't think they had to back then... but yes, definitions change over time, and using the most recent one is most relevant to this discussion.

    Just out of curiosity, I looked up "Troll" and there is NO reference to the internet; there are references to move in a circular direction; to sing rounds; to fish; and of course to supernatural beings. But nothing about internet behavior. AND in fact, there STILL is nothing about internet behaviour in the current definition -
    Troll - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

    So we know internet trolls exist, even though the definition doesn't include them.

    Marriage between same sex IS part of the definition; why does anyone deny it?

  4. #534
    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
    went back to my 1983 Webster dictionary - 30 years ago. Won't do the whole thing - this is the full, 2,000+ page dictionary, unabridged, so it's a long definition. But some parts of it:

    Marriage:
    1. The state of being married; relation between husband and wife; married life; wedlock; matrimony
    2. the act of marrying; wedding
    3. the rite or form used in marrying
    4. any close or intimate union.

    Even back then, they don't specify opposite genders. "any close or intimate union".

    Now of course you'll say they didn't think they had to back then... but yes, definitions change over time, and using the most recent one is most relevant to this discussion.

    Just out of curiosity, I looked up "Troll" and there is NO reference to the internet; there are references to move in a circular direction; to sing rounds; to fish; and of course to supernatural beings. But nothing about internet behavior. AND in fact, there STILL is nothing about internet behaviour in the current definition -
    Troll - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

    So we know internet trolls exist, even though the definition doesn't include them.

    Marriage between same sex IS part of the definition; why does anyone deny it?
    They didn't specify because it never meant gay marriage. Again, gay marriage is a very new definition.

    It will probably soon be, but right now it isn't.

  5. #535
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,122

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

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    They didn't specify because it never meant gay marriage. Again, gay marriage is a very new definition.

    It will probably soon be, but right now it isn't.
    Once again, go back several centuries and you have two different Roman emperors who married men. The first same sex marriage ban was created in Rome. Not exactly new when same sex marriage existed a millennium before our country even did.
    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.

  6. #536
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,586

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Go back to ancient Rome and you have two different emperors who were married to men. What is your point?
    Roman law did not recognize a marriage between two men. so why do you even bring it up when it technically doesn't help you in any way.

    So? how is that relevant?
    history has never recognized homosexual relationships. doesn't mean they didn't happen but no law ever recognized the marriage. it was consistantly recognized as a man and a women.

    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?
    they didn't but activist judges are taking a very narrow ruling of the SC and making it a broad general ruling. The SC ruled that the federal government cannot define marriage it never said anything about the states that it technically was a state rights issue.

    activist judges are now taking a broad stroke and changing laws without cause simply because they don't like the laws.

  7. #537
    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
    They didn't specify because it never meant gay marriage. Again, gay marriage is a very new definition.

    It will probably soon be, but right now it isn't.

    we've shown you the dictionary definition

    We've said that many states and countries don't define it as opposite sex only

    we've pointed out the federal govt now accepts marriage as between same sex couples

    That it is recent (2009 for Merriam Webster according to another poster) is irrelevant

    So therefore, there is nothing more to say to you. You refuse to accept evidence presented and documented, you refuse to qualify your statement.

    So - have a nice day. Your contribution to this forum has been unuseful.

  8. #538
    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
    activist judges are now taking a broad stroke and changing laws without cause simply because they don't like the laws.
    Or possibly because they realize there is no overriding reason to remove this right from same sex couples? That you don't deny a constitutional right to a group of people without a very good reason?

  9. #539
    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
    we've shown you the dictionary definition

    We've said that many states and countries don't define it as opposite sex only

    we've pointed out the federal govt now accepts marriage as between same sex couples

    That it is recent (2009 for Merriam Webster according to another poster) is irrelevant
    When was it changed?

    Many do.

    No, they just stopped denying benefits.

    Feel free to leave the discussion.

  10. #540
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,586

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

    We've said that many states and countries don't define it as opposite sex only
    yet ignoring the fact that many of them do.

    we've pointed out the federal govt now accepts marriage as between same sex couples
    no it doesn't it says that the federal government cannot define what marriage is.

    Your contribution to this forum has been unuseful.
    about as useful as ignoring opinions you don't agree with.

Posting Permissions

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