• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

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

Lursa said:
They dont teach that. Anymore than they teach that heterosexuality is socially acceptable. Do they do that? If so, how? Because THAT would be teaching morality as well.
Click to expand...

DAMN. DO SCHOOLS DO THAT? I want my money back! I want my kids taught that heterosexuality is a foul thing that leads to rapes, sexual assault, and ickiness!!! do they really teach that??? I need to sue!!!!
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

ernst barkmann said:
so tell me why have their been court cases, of people who object to what the school is doing concerning homosexuality?

why has a MASS judge ordered that kids will learn, about homosexuality past, and present.

.
Click to expand...

Any links on that?
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

ernst barkmann said:
so tell me why have their been court cases, of people who object to what the school is doing concerning homosexuality?

why has a MASS judge ordered that kids will learn, about homosexuality past, and present.
Click to expand...

WHAT!!!!! Kids will be taught that homosexuals are human beings just like heterosexuals? Seriously!!!! What's next, schools will teach that blacks are normal people and not inferior to whites? Well....we certainly cannot have that. What are our public schools coming to, after all!!!!
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

disneydude said:
No. Do you have no understanding of how caselaw works? You might want to educate yourself on the judicial process and then come back to the discussion.
Click to expand...

You better explain it, because I'm not a lawyer or judge or anything (and I prey to God that you are not!). Please tell how that gets written into the Constitution, or, in other words, amends it.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

Anthony60 said:
You better explain it, because I'm not a lawyer or judge or anything (and I prey to God that you are not!). Please tell how that gets written into the Constitution, or, in other words, amends it.
Click to expand...

I actually am a lawyer and have been one for about 25 years. The explanation is simple. There are two ways that laws are made in this country, one is by legistlative drafting of the laws and the other is through the courts interpreting the laws and Constitutions. This is called "Caselaw"....and the foundation of our court system. Walk into a law library and you will see volumes upon volumes of published case digests where the caselaw is published. If you pick up a legal opinion, you will see judges referring to previous caselaw (aka "precedent") when they cite their cases. Loving v. Virginia was a case brought before the Virginia Supreme Court. There was no clear interpretation of the law. The holding in Loving thus became caselaw and binding "precedent" in the state of Virginia...and later the US Supreme Court. Thus, through Loving, the right to marriage was recognized as a fundamental right of this country.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

disneydude said:
You are starting from a flawed premise. The correct analysis would be "nothing in the Constitution prohibits the government from teaching values"....the Constitution is very clear about Government being involved in Religion. It really is that simple if you read and understand the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Not true. The correct "premise" is that if the Constitution does not specifically grant a power to the federal government, then that power resides with the state or the people. The federal government does not have that power.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

ernst barkmann said:
wrong.... the government has no moral authority at all...if it did, I could tell us what to eat drink and run our very lifes....nothing in any constitution givers government that authority
Click to expand...

Laws are in fact the government's way of displaying it's moral authority.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

ernst barkmann said:
wrong.... the government has no moral authority at all...if it did, I could tell us what to eat drink and run our very lifes....nothing in any constitution givers government that authority
Click to expand...

Really? It has whatever authority is given to it by the people. Surly you see laws prohibiting bigamy as moral authority. I will agree that the federal gov't has far less moral authority than a state gov't does but to assert that no moral authority exists is absurd. We joined WWII (in Europe) based on moral authority, in fact most wars are now fought on moral grounds.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

disneydude said:
I actually am a lawyer and have been one for about 25 years... Loving v. Virginia was a case brought before the Virginia Supreme Court. There was no clear interpretation of the law. The holding in Loving thus became caselaw and binding "precedent" in the state of Virginia...and later the US Supreme Court. Thus, through Loving, the right to marriage was recognized as a fundamental right of this country.
Click to expand...

I really hope you are lying about being a lawyer. I mean, precedent is binding? Are you kidding? You must be the worst lawyer in the world. If it was binding, we'd still have slavery. Since, I guess you don't know this, it was ruled to be the law of the land. You don't even know how the Constitution works. OMG!
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

Anthony60 said:
Not true. The correct "premise" is that if the Constitution does not specifically grant a power to the federal government, then that power resides with the state or the people. The federal government does not have that power.
Click to expand...


The 14th grants the power to ensure that States do not infringe on the rights of citizens, that all are afforded due process and equal protection under the law.


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

WorldWatcher said:
The 14th grants the power to ensure that States do not infringe on the rights of citizens, that all are afforded due process and equal protection under the law.


>>>>
Click to expand...

That is not the whole of it. Obviously the 2A is not equally applied by the states yet the federal gov't does not intervene. Unfortunately, rights are simply whatever the gov't says that they are. Our nine robed umpires have no power to toss penalty flags and may simply refuse to rule on a matter. There is also the silly requirement of "standing" meaning that one cannot challenge the constitutionality of a law unless they can show direct personal harm - often that would require breaking the law which is simply insane.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

digsbe said:
For no rational reason? He pretty much writes off the reasons that the majority of voters had when voting and is saying they are not rational. This needs to be appealed and overturned, what a far far far overstepping of judicial rule.
Click to expand...

Federal judges exist to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. People can not merely vote in a law that goes against the Constitution. The judge simply did his job.

I am not making a statement of merits of the particular case, but we hear lots of complaints about judges going against the "will of the majority" and I am just saying that sometimes that is their job/
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

Anthony60 said:
I really hope you are lying about being a lawyer. I mean, precedent is binding? Are you kidding? You must be the worst lawyer in the world. If it was binding, we'd still have slavery. Since, I guess you don't know this, it was ruled to be the law of the land. You don't even know how the Constitution works. OMG!
Click to expand...

You just demonstrated for all to see that you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Sorry....but it isn't worth the time trying to educate you.
 
Re: Gay Marriage Ban Struck in Utah by Federal Judge

brothern said:
That's, wow, out of the blue. The state can appeal the ruling, of course.
I haven't been able to figure out if same-sex couples can have a license issued in the state of Utah, or not?
Click to expand...
 Anyone?

Federal judge strikes down Utah



Obama appointment, btw.
Click to expand...




Lots of licenses have been issued and used. The Mormons in Utah are tearing their hair out and shoving it up their butts.

Read about it here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/world-us-canada-25501630

I predict that any appeals that the State of Utah launches will not make it past the U.S. Supreme Court.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

digsbe said:
For no rational reason? He pretty much writes off the reasons that the majority of voters had when voting and is saying they are not rational. T
his needs to be appealed and overturned, what a far far far overstepping of judicial rule.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




Utah is appealing it, but I very much doubt that the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn this.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself."~ Robert Green Ingersoll
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

Lursa said:
If it goes to a citizen vote in that state, just IMO it would lose. Would a judge then be able to overturn it? They did in CA, but it was overturned again.

In my state, the state legistature voted to legalize SSM, but according to state laws, the 'pro-family' organizations got enough signatures to force a citizens' vote...which they lost.

All this back and forth is kind of a waste if the highest judicial systems are all pretty much on the same page and just going to overturn anything denying SSM.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




Correct.

Ultimately the courts in this country decide what the laws actually say and which laws are constitutional.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

WorldWatcher said:
The 14th grants the power to ensure that States do not infringe on the rights of citizens, that all are afforded due process and equal protection under the law.>>>>
Click to expand...

And does not address marriage in any way. And there's an idea. If you want gay unions to be enshrined in the Constitution as marriage, just amend it. After all, we've done it with citizenship and voting. It's the only sure fire way.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

Lursa said:
If it goes to a citizen vote in that state, just IMO it would lose. Would a judge then be able to overturn it? They did in CA, but it was overturned again.

In my state, the state legistature voted to legalize SSM, but according to state laws, the 'pro-family' organizations got enough signatures to force a citizens' vote...which they lost.

All this back and forth is kind of a waste if the highest judicial systems are all pretty much on the same page and just going to overturn anything denying SSM.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




Ultimately SSM will be legal all over the USA because the judges will decide that you can't grant a right to some people and deny it to others.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

disneydude said:
Why are you against schools teaching about the civil rights movement? Just because it offends the "moral values" of some bigots?
Click to expand...

Because many parents don't consider gay marriage to be a civil rights issue. Yeah, yeah, save your breath, we already know you do.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

disneydude said:
You are starting from a flawed premise. The correct analysis would be "nothing in the Constitution prohibits the government from teaching values"....the Constitution is very clear about Government being involved in Religion. It really is that simple if you read and understand the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Try to keep your story straight. In one post you're arguing that religion does not equal values, and here you're saying they're the same. Which is it?

Have YOU read and understood the Constitution? You wouldn't know it from your posts here.
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

clownboy said:
Because many parents don't consider gay marriage to be a civil rights issue. Yeah, yeah, save your breath, we already know you do.
Click to expand...



Why should anyone be allowed to refuse service to blacks just because their "moral values" tell them that blacks are "icky"?
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

clownboy said:
Try to keep your story straight. In one post you're arguing that religion does not equal values, and here you're saying they're the same. Which is it?

Have YOU read and understood the Constitution? You wouldn't know it from your posts here.
Click to expand...

I never said that religion does not equal values. You need to work on your reading comprehension. What I said was that "values" are not contingent on religion. Certainly religion instills a lot of values, but one can have values without religion (something that you may not have understood).
 
Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

clownboy said:
Yeah, because the explanations provided are just "lipstick on a pig". There is no federal right to marry.



I have the same view of your opinon on this matter
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...




Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on this matter, but the only opinion that will really matter in the long run is the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court when it eventually rules on this.

Does anyone really think that it will deny the right to marry to some people in the USA and grant that same right to others?

I don't believe that will ever happen because it would violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom