Page 12 of 45 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 444

Thread: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

  1. #111
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:46 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,315
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post

    Third, the reason I say that the lower court cases are somewhat useless is because one, ultimately SCOTUS is going to have a say and it's the only one that matters, and two, many are basing it off a principle that has not been established at the SCOTUS level yet...that sexual orientation is greater than rational basis scrutiny, more akin with middle teir (like gender) or strict (like race).
    This is where you go wrong. Judges have rules, and likely will continue to rule, that SSM bans fail even under Rational Basis Review. While the consensus among the judges ruling so far seems the be that Intermediate Scrutiny would apply since SSM is ultimately a question of gender, I know of no ruling yet that has stated that bans on SSM would pass Rational basis Review, and several have specifically said it would not. The judges who have ruled such have stated that the SSM bans are arbitrary, not based on a rational basis.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #112
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:46 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,315
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    Oh why do you bigots want to stand in the way of LOVE and EQUAL RIGHTS? How un-American. Just because your personal moral beliefs are against pedophilia, doesn't mean you have a right to force everyone else to adhere to your rules. Keep your religion out of other people's bedrooms. Why are you such a xenophobe?

    (Sarcasm, in case the degenerate state of our culture makes it unclear)
    There is no law against pedophilia. There are laws against having sex with children since they cannot give informed consent. You might want to learn about the laws of this country, and also about logical fallacies and how to avoid making them.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #113
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    and another one
    and another one
    and another one bites the dust

    even thought this one was stayed (which is awesome in itself because it will go to SCOTUS) the two court cases by FEDERAL judge have BIG TIME verbiage in them. not just saying equality or equal rights or unfair discrimination but UNCONSTITUTIONAL and VIOLATES THE 14th AMENDMENT

    HUGE steps
    this is awesome equal rights is coming and coming soon!!!!!



    link
    Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional | NBC4 Washington

    back-up links:
    Judge: Va. Same-Sex Marriage Ban Unconstitutional - ABC News
    Virginia judge strikes down gay marriage ban
    Judge rules VA gay marriage ban unconstitutional - NBC12.com - Richmond, VA News
    Federal judge declares Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional | Fox News
    Are you at all worried that this might accelerate a battle at the Supreme Court before the Court is ready to give such a sweeping ruling? In that event you'd calcify existing SSM bans forcing you to fight them one by one.

  4. #114
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:14 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,637

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    You're in favor of heterosexual marriage, therefore you must allow heterosexual child marriage!

    See, it is a fallacy. The arguments for same-sex marriage do not apply to pedophilia or bestiality. Animals and children cannot sign legal contracts, and a rational state interest is served by keeping it that way.
    your above is a strawman.
    a clear distortion of the argument.

    if you support gay marriage but not polygamy then you are being just as a bigot as people that think marriage is between 1 man and 1 women.
    which is the next step and the next argument in courts.

    they are going to use the same arguments as gay couples are using.

    i will leave the whole nambla thing out of it since that will fail no matter what. polygamists on the other hand have an argument to make and it is just as strong as gays.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Changing most marriage laws from a man and a woman to two people requires little but verbage change. That is SIGNIFICANTLY different when you start allowing people to get married to multiple people.

    Tax law, inheretance, power of attorny, property rights, divorce law, child custody, etc all would not simply need a verbage change but a complete rewrite to account for this. This is an additional burdern onto the government that absolutely can be taken into account and is absolutely not present in the same sex marriage debate.
    zyphlin
    actually it is causing a lot of changes. gay couples have kids. who is the father or mother of the child and who is the one that supplies the child support etc...
    all of these are causing a lot of issues. who pay the alimony in the marriage is the marriage fails.

    in any event yes there is in fact a lot of laws that have to be changed.

  5. #115
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Red and Wolf. Thanks for that info. I'm still interested to see what SCOTUS rules on it, as ultimately they're the ones that are going to truly matter. That notion doesn't really change my feeling that ultimately I don't care too much about the various results of these lower court decisions becuase they're basically secondary to the only one that will have any meaningful impact.

  6. #116
    Professor
    wolfsgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,140

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    your above is a strawman.
    a clear distortion of the argument.

    if you support gay marriage but not polygamy then you are being just as a bigot as people that think marriage is between 1 man and 1 women.
    which is the next step and the next argument in courts.

    they are going to use the same arguments as gay couples are using.

    i will leave the whole nambla thing out of it since that will fail no matter what. polygamists on the other hand have an argument to make and it is just as strong as gays.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------


    zyphlin
    actually it is causing a lot of changes. gay couples have kids. who is the father or mother of the child and who is the one that supplies the child support etc...
    all of these are causing a lot of issues. who pay the alimony in the marriage is the marriage fails.

    in any event yes there is in fact a lot of laws that have to be changed.
    Both parents are parents.
    The one that pays alimony is the higher wage earner.

    Just like in heterosexual marriages.
    No laws need to be changed.
    " May you live as long as you wish, and love as long as you live"
    R.A. Heinlein

  7. #117
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    zyphlin
    actually it is causing a lot of changes.
    Sure, it causes changes. However, I specifically spoke to changes of LAW. Let's see what you reference

    who is the father or mother of the child
    Not really an issue of the Law but of definition within ones own family.

    and who is the one that supplies the child support etc
    To my understanding, this is not something currently under the law that is determined singularly by "Whose the mother and whose the father". Both women and men can potentially have to pay child support depending on where custody lies. Not seeing a significant change or rework in the law here.

    who pay the alimony in the marriage is the marriage fails.
    Again, under the current rules both the wife or the husband could end up having to pay alimony. As such, it'd still remain...either spouse could end up having to pay alimony. Are you under a misconception that only "husbands" pay it?

    in any event yes there is in fact a lot of laws that have to be changed.
    Laws will have to be changed, but not to any significant impact and largely in superficial matters.

    Take the Tax Law for example. The only significant change is allowing for two spouses rather than specifically husband/wife if it's written into law. Under a polygamous marriage though, an entire new subsection of laws would need to be written. Why's that you ask?

    Person A marries Person B. Person B marries person C. Person A is not marrie to person C, however Person B is sharing income with both person A and person B. What income goes to which tax returns? Can Person C claim a child of Person A and Person B as a dependent since it's technically the chlid of the person they're married to? And I can go on and on.

    How about spousal privledge with medical conditions. Person B in the above situation is in the hospital, incapacitated. Which spouse, A or C, has the right to make medical decisions?

    The addition of additional individuals into the marriage contract creates a whole host of new issues and situations that are ENTIRELY non-existant in the two person dychotomy and must be account for. Where as with same sex marriage, the primary thing that has to be accounted for is simply VERBAGE.

  8. #118
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------


    zyphlin
    actually it is causing a lot of changes. gay couples have kids. who is the father or mother of the child and who is the one that supplies the child support etc...
    all of these are causing a lot of issues. who pay the alimony in the marriage is the marriage fails.

    in any event yes there is in fact a lot of laws that have to be changed.
    I suspect that with great agony eventually the biological Mom or Dad will have preference in family court, however I do see a situation developing where it will be successfully argued that one of the non-bio parents will be the psychological parent of the child, and there's already been some precedent to back that up, juts not in a gay coupling case. In terms of the court there is no material difference between a psychological parent and that of a biological one. The courts are already moving in this direction, BUT oh boy I see a big USSC case on this issue looming. Secondly, child support is easy to figure out. They take both parents incomes, and depending on the number of children a percentage is decided, usually 25% for one kid 27% for two etc.. Then they pro rate the parent who does not have physical custody and that will be their payment each month out their gross pay, tax free to the other parent. Pretty sweet deal eh? Problem is, with two equally qualified parents, there will have to be shared physical custody, and that again will bring legal challenges to the courts, I guarantee it. Thirdly, maintenance is also an easy calculation, the working partner pays the non working partner usually for a period that is at least equal to how many years they have been married. Or, you give the house and alimony goes away.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  9. #119
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:46 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,315
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Red and Wolf. Thanks for that info. I'm still interested to see what SCOTUS rules on it, as ultimately they're the ones that are going to truly matter. That notion doesn't really change my feeling that ultimately I don't care too much about the various results of these lower court decisions becuase they're basically secondary to the only one that will have any meaningful impact.
    If I had to guess, I suspect, at least in the short run, SCOTUS will punt. Simply not accepting any of these cases, leaving intact the lower court rulings and the ability of the court to revisit it at another time. What I think we learned with Windsor and Hollingsworth is that SCOTUS did not really want to tackle the meat of the issue beyond reaffirming that the federal government has to recognize marriages performed by states(a states rights issue more than an SSM one).
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  10. #120
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    If I had to guess, I suspect, at least in the short run, SCOTUS will punt. Simply not accepting any of these cases, leaving intact the lower court rulings and the ability of the court to revisit it at another time.
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the SCOTUS put stays on actions in Utah (and now Virginia) where the laws were over turned, thus disallowing them from actively ALLOWING same sex marriages?

    If my understanding of that is correct, I can't see SCOTUS punting. To me that says they very much plan to take up this issue and rather than having lower courts create a jumbled mess of situations as people try to fight the change/enforce the change they are simply saying "Stay with the status quo until we deal with this".

    I don't see how they could do that, and then just sit on it and not take action.

    Unless my understanding of the stays in places like Utah are off base, I have to imagine within the next year the SCOTUS will come down with a ruling on one of these cases that either clearly asserts that 1) same sex marriage is constitutionally protected under the US Constitution, so states can't deem otherwise OR 2) Same sex marriage is not constitutionally protected under the US Constitution, so states can deme otherwise. I don't really see a third way to really go there.

    What I think we learned with Windsor and Hollingsworth is that SCOTUS did not really want to tackle the meat of the issue beyond reaffirming that the federal government has to recognize marriages performed by states(a states rights issue more than an SSM one).
    And I agere there to a point. The problem is that both sides are grabbing Windsor and using it as a means of suggesting that the SCOTUS either are saying state laws ARE unconstitutional or saying that they aren't. I think they tried to go for a middle way (The federal government has to recognize it, but states can determine their own) and both sides basically said "NO DICE!" and the only real resolution is an either/or decision.

Page 12 of 45 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... 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
  •