Page 5 of 27 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 265

Thread: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

  1. #41
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    10th Amendment. Marriage is a right, but it's not a specifically enumerated right, so according to the 10th Amendment regulating the right of marriage falls to the states.
    Exactly....however, as Judge Kennedy indicated in the DOMA decision (if you read it you would know).....While states are free to requlate marriage, they must do so in a way that does not violate the Constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection. THIS is what got SCALIA all up in arms. The writing is on the wall. The SCOTUS said...sure states you can continue to regulate marriage, but you cannot violate the Constitution while doing so. In other words, you cannot restrict marriage to heterosexuals only unless there is a legitimate state interest in doing so...and so far, the anti-marriage equality folk have been unable to come up with a legitimate state interest in doing so that comports with Constitutional muster.
    Last edited by disneydude; 01-14-14 at 08:21 PM.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  2. #42
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Some may see it as that, and honestly I could care less and expect many of your opinion to see my post and views that way.

    The state's should have the right to define marriage and uphold the traditional definition of marriage that has been the legal precedence for many years. There have been no new amendments to the Constitution regarding sexuality or private sex practices. People have been making the political and ethical arguments that one's personal sex choices and relationships are somehow a protected right and no state can uphold traditional marriage because those sex practices and relationships do not fit within that definition. If they want this a Constitutional Amendment should be added, rulings shouldn't happen due to changes in public opinion or judicial activism. Stretching the Constitution to make classes of people, based on their sexual preferences and practices, protected classes and revoking and denying people the ability to make laws that are very much in line with past popular beliefs is tyranny. It is tyrannical to force the states that have upheld traditional marriage, and the people of those states who voted on such, to remove those laws is making those people second class citizens, trampling on their state's right to govern, and imposing a social view in a tyrannical way without an amendment ratified into the Constitution. I don't think any rational person would say that such rulings would happen 50 years ago or maybe even 30 years ago, only until recently with political pushes and changes in social beliefs do we see these things. People lost political battles, and now they want to force their opinion and beliefs into laws by trying to enshrine their views as the ultimate law of the land and in doing so restricting the freedoms of others to vote. I have absolutely no problem if states want to legalize SSM or if they want to uphold traditional marriage. However, that should be left up to the states and the Constitution, as it is now, should not force states that uphold traditional marriage to reject legally held definitions and having social changes on the issue be the driving force behind revoking the voting privileges and rights of others.
    FACTS
    there is no tyranny
    government protected equal/individual rights
    freedom to vote is intact
    states rights are intact
    rights of others are intact
    NOBODY is made a second class citizen by granting equal rights
    there is no force on the people

    theres no facts to support they hyperbole you keep posting, its emotional ranting based on nothing else
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #43
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Nick View Post
    Marriage isn't a right first off all and secondly marriage is a state recognized contract..
    Of course it is a right decided by various legal decisions:

    Skinner v Oklahoma: "Marriage “one of the basic civil rights of man" Google Scholar

    Loving v Virginia: "“The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.” Google Scholar

    Cleveland Board of Education v LaFeur: "“This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” 14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage is a Fundamental Right | American Foundation for Equal Rights

    Carey v Population Services International: “[I]t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education.” 14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage is a Fundamental Right | American Foundation for Equal Rights

    Zablocki v. Redhail:“[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.” Google Scholar

    Turner v Safely: "“[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” Google Scholar

    MLB v SLJ: “Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as ‘of basic importance in our society,’ rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.” M. L. B. v. S. L. J. - 519 U.S. 102 (1996) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center

    Want to argue with that?
    With what exactly? That somehow giving people equal protection under the law somehow leads to "authoritarianism"?


    Why not just argue for anarchy and abolish the entire Bill of Rights and Constitution while we're at it or are you just selective in which rights you recognize and those you don't?
    Where am i arguing for "anarchy"?


    As far as I'm concerned the State and Feds shouldn't be involved in the "marriage businesses" for numerous reasons.
    Well your opinion certainly seems to be loosing, and I say about god damn time. Equality now!


  4. #44
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Thank you. That's the quote I needed for future use. The next time I object to some random pro-SSM argument, I will inevitable be accused of trying to put the government in the bedroom, or some similar nonsense. I trust you won't mind my quoting you so as to set them straight (no pun intended).

    Matters of public policy are everyone's business. It doesn't need to directly effect you in any way for you to have a say as a tax-paying voter.
    To have an opinion on an issue i cant express that opinion because you dont like it? Is that what you are getting at?


  5. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Here is a list of the fourteen cases, with links to the opinions and citations to the Court’s discussion of the right to marry:


    1. Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 205, 211 (1888): Marriage is “the most important relation in life” and “the foundation of the family and society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.


    2. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923): The right “to marry, establish a home and bring up children” is a central part of liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.


    3. Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942): Marriage “one of the basic civil rights of man,” “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.”


    4. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 486 (1965): We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights—older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.”


    5. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967): The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.


    6. Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 376, 383 (1971): [M]arriage involves interests of basic importance to our society” and is “a fundamental human relationship.”


    7. Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 639-40 (1974): This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”


    8. Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 499 (1977) (plurality): “[W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation.”


    9. Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678, 684-85 (1977): [I]t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education.


    10. Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978): [T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.”


    11. Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987): [T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” and an “expression[ ] of emotional support and public commitment.”


    12. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992): These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”


    13. M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102, 116 (1996): Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as ‘of basic importance in our society,’ rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.


    14. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 574 (2003): “[O]ur laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and education. … Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do.”


    Marriage itself is a right, and the right to marry someone of the same-sex falls under your right to free association.
    The courts are probably one of the more powerful and ****ed up systems in our brand of democracy....... The courts overrule direct democracy and insert their own powertower...

    300 million US citizens don't need 50-100 district judges overruling direct democracy, while they waste taxpayer money after and appeal has been made - that's hard earned money down to toilet after the voice of the people have spoken and a minority didn't agree with the conclusion..... Imagine if our presidential elections were this ****ed up every year.

    Makes no sense to me....

    Especially if progressives believe Gore won in 2004.

  6. #46
    Hot Flash Mama
    Summerwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Last Seen
    01-23-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,010

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Nick View Post
    The real legal argument here is that if someone is truly gay or are using the "loophole" as a tax evasion mechanism - yeah like that Adam Sandler movie....

    Social welfare is already abused - why would this be any different.

    What we going to do hire social welfare workers making union wages to check up on these alleged "gay couples" to ensure they're "gay."

    It may sound comedical but it's true...
    Based on the number of extramarital affairs and divorces, I'd say that it's pretty questionable how many heteros are married in a fraudulent way. As a matter of fact, how many folks do you know, I know about 5 couples, who are separated longer than 2 two years and aren't divorced yet, why???? because they want to keep getting the benefits of being married, taxes as well as all other benefits, like insurance for spouse and so on.
    jallman: "It's all good. At least you have a thick skin and can take being poked fun back at without crying. "

  7. #47
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    UPDATE

    1/5/14 Version 4.0


    19 States with Equal Rights or in limbo


    Massachusetts - May 17, 2004
    Connecticut - November 12, 2008
    Iowa - April 27, 2009
    Vermont - September 1, 2009
    New Hampshire - January 1, 2010
    Washing D.C. - March 9, 2010
    FALL OF DADT Dec 18, 2010
    New York - July 24, 2011
    Washington - December 6, 2012
    Maine - December 29, 2012
    Maryland - January 1, 2013
    FALL OF DOMA - June 26, 2013
    California - June 28, 2013
    Delaware - July 1, 2013
    Rhode Island - August 1, 2013
    Minnesota - August 1, 2013
    New Jersey - October 21, 2013
    Hawaii - December 2, 2013
    New Mexico – December 19, 2013
    Utah – December 20. 2013 (appealing to supreme court! )
    Illinois - June 1, 2014 effective
    Oklahoma - Currently Stayed

    21 States Working Towards Equal Rights


    13 States with Pending Court Cases to Establish Equal Rights
    Alaska (Suit to be filed this month)
    Kentucky
    Idaho
    Louisiana
    Michigan (Feb 2014 Trial)
    Mississippi
    North Carolina
    Pennsylvania (June 14 Trial)
    South Carolina
    Tennessee (Direct US Constitution Challenge)
    Texas (Jan 2014 Trial, Direct US Constitution Challenge)
    Virginia (two different suits, one involves Prop8 lawyers) Hearing will be before Jan 30th
    West Virginia


    4 States with Court Case(s) and Legislation to establish Equal Rights
    Arizona
    Arkansas (Decesion Pending and 2016 ballot)
    Nevada
    Ohio (December 2013 trial) Trial had narrow ruling that ohio will recognize OTHER state marriages but didn’t impact bans. New cases expected.


    3 States with Legislation to Establish Equal Rights
    Colorado
    Florida
    Oregon


    thats 39 states that could have equal rights by 2016 and some much sooner!
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    10th Amendment. Marriage is a right, but it's not a specifically enumerated right, so according to the 10th Amendment regulating the right of marriage falls to the states.
    Yes, it does, hence the feds have no involvement in the situation considering they have to amendment for marriage.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    To have an opinion on an issue i cant express that opinion because you dont like it? Is that what you are getting at?
    Nope. Not even remotely close.

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: US judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Marriage is a legal contract of committment. It is still laughable to believe that a court saying that a state cannot impose discriminatory limitations on the rights of its citizens to enter into that contract is somehow "Authoritarian". If anything....it is the exact opposite.
    Then what you call a prenup?

Page 5 of 27 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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