Page 110 of 116 FirstFirst ... 1060100108109110111112 ... LastLast
Results 1,091 to 1,100 of 1157

Thread: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

  1. #1091
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    That is not the Equal Protection Clause. The EPC does not mention anything about race or color at all.

    The Equal Protection Clause is located at the end of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment:

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    That is the EPC. The thing you quoted is not the Amendment itself so it has no real bearing on the relevant portion of the Amendment being used to strike down the laws. You don't get to claim that if something isn't written in the Constitution, then it shouldn't apply then try to apply something that is not written in that particular part of the Amendment being used.
    Since we have recorded what the framers of the 14th were actually intending, what was included and what was meant to be included by means of study of said discussion and debates, in other words why the amendment was created which is not at all what you were saying it was created for... just like we are familiar and take into consideration the debates/discussions of the founders of our original Constitution and the Bill of Rights...

    I rather doubt that the framers would have EVER allowed such language to be considered allowing this free-for- all you intend to saddle us with regards to just the areas of gender and marriage. Loving they would have no doubt allowed, Loving was reasonable interpretation of the 14th perhaps... we could certainly debate that... but there is no basis, except on the limited conveyance of specific citizenship and rights to African Americans across the broad spectrum of community in the US of those that had been previously "legally" enslaved but were now free yet in citizenship limbo.

    The framers of the 14th were unwise to leave their language so loose, but then they could have had no idea to what extent the misuse, abuse and exploitation of their meaning would so falsely be undertaken. The license that the courts have taken with this and other areas of the Constitution, in which the federal government has absolutely no business, should be repossessed, returned to its proper place. We have all grown up assimilating these power grabs as something considered normal course, but where in fact, this is just federal and judicial overreach into areas best left, and intended to be left, to the states and to the people [ which was, by the 9th and 10th amendments being selectively incorporated under the 14th] by this very amendment confirmed.

    This is actually, in my opinion, where the the courts SHOULD BE utilized, to protect the 9th and the 10th, amendments which have been long long since been neglected and therefore molested... especially that 10th, which accepts, appreciates and indulges the rights and powers of the true masters here.

    WE, the People.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  2. #1092
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,054

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    Since we have recorded what the framers of the 14th were actually intending, what was included and what was meant to be included by means of study of said discussion and debates, in other words why the amendment was created which is not at all what you were saying it was created for... just like we are familiar and take into consideration the debates/discussions of the founders of our original Constitution and the Bill of Rights...

    I rather doubt that the framers would have EVER allowed such language to be considered allowing this free-for- all you intend to saddle us with regards to just the areas of gender and marriage. Loving they would have no doubt allowed, Loving was reasonable interpretation of the 14th perhaps... we could certainly debate that... but there is no basis, except on the limited conveyance of specific citizenship and rights to African Americans across the broad spectrum of community in the US of those that had been previously "legally" enslaved but were now free yet in citizenship limbo.

    The framers of the 14th were unwise to leave their language so loose, but then they could have had no idea to what extent the misuse, abuse and exploitation of their meaning would so falsely be undertaken. The license that the courts have taken with this and other areas of the Constitution, in which the federal government has absolutely no business, should be repossessed, returned to its proper place. We have all grown up assimilating these power grabs as something considered normal course, but where in fact, this is just federal and judicial overreach into areas best left, and intended to be left, to the states and to the people [ which was, by the 9th and 10th amendments being selectively incorporated under the 14th] by this very amendment confirmed.

    This is actually, in my opinion, where the the courts SHOULD BE utilized, to protect the 9th and the 10th, amendments which have been long long since been neglected and therefore molested... especially that 10th, which accepts, appreciates and indulges the rights and powers of the true masters here.

    WE, the People.
    If the framers wanted an Amendment to not be used to protect other rights, then they could have written it very selectively in order to ensure that it only covered that specific area or rights for specific people in specific situations. They didn't. They wrote the EPC of the 14th so that it covered everyone's rights, not just those that they knew needed the protection most at that time. They had no way to truly know if their intentions would actually be known to us here in the future when it comes to writing any Amendment.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  3. #1093
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    If the framers wanted an Amendment to not be used to protect other rights, then they could have written it very selectively in order to ensure that it only covered that specific area or rights for specific people in specific situations. They didn't. They wrote the EPC of the 14th so that it covered everyone's rights, not just those that they knew needed the protection most at that time. They had no way to truly know if their intentions would actually be known to us here in the future when it comes to writing any Amendment.
    Go ahead and prove your "thesis", please. Regale us with where you find your interpretation.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  4. #1094
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,125

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    Go ahead and prove your "thesis", please. Regale us with where you find your interpretation.
    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

  5. #1095
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by blarg View Post
    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
    This type of post is exactly why often one doesn't bother responding to some posts/posters.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  6. #1096
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Lol, yeah - by arguing the government wants gays to get married so it can get its hands on... fewer taxes? Hey, I'm sorry you actually got caught making up nonsensical ****. As it stands by not getting married, the average unmarried couple (gay or straight) pays MORE in taxes than their married counterparts. Again, this is a fact - unlike half of your ridiculous opinions. So if the government ever becomes supportive of gays getting married - it won't be due to taxing more.

    Again, this is something only people who are actually married or even in a basic **** friend relationship would know and something which the perpetually single wouldn't.
    So perpetually single people, in the eyes of the law, would be inherently more uninformed than perpetually single, in the eyes of the law, gay people? Based on what evidence? Perhaps its the fact that perpetually single heteros are not incessantly making donkey butts out of themselves clamoring for "equal rights"protections?

    And there are a lot more of this particular minority than there are gay folk. Gay folk, at least the politically active ones, seem never satisfied with all that they truly deserve, tolerance. Won't be satisfied with marriage either, that won't make "it" all better.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  7. #1097
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    ... Marriage has been declared a right by the SCOTUS on several occasions.
    There is something fundamentally wrong with this notion, that because a body of 9 people appointed for life, and more so, usually paired down to one swing Justice sits on high, and just "deems" things....Anyone else see anything wrong with this?
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #1098
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,340
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    There is something fundamentally wrong with this notion, that because a body of 9 people appointed for life, and more so, usually paired down to one swing Justice sits on high, and just "deems" things....Anyone else see anything wrong with this?
    Aren't you one of thsoe Rah Rah Constitution guys?

    Why would the founders set up such a flawed system.... maybe it's in need for a... change

  9. #1099
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Those with positions regarding homosexuals were the ones that BANNED Civil Unions in many State Constitutions. You are now trying to use "Civil Unions" as a fallback not that you are no longer a majority position. Anti-marriage equality is losing in the courts, losing in the polls, losing in the legislatures, and now losing in the ballot box in general elections - and "now" suddenly Civil Unions are acceptable.

    Sounds like "when I'm in the majority it's my way or the highway, now that we aren't - it's time to come to a compromise". I don't blame homosexuals going for full equality instead of separate but equal considering how the compromise door was slammed shut in many states a decade ago.



    >>>>
    Correct, times are changing and people are for more accepting of gays so at this juncture a civil union act would sail right through.

  10. #1100
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Surely you remember that 'separate but equal' was determined to be unConstitutional?

    Not to mention that 'marriage' means exactly the same thing to gays as it does to many straight couples. So why shouldnt they be able to 'marry?'
    Separate but equal was about things like schools and restrooms not marriage.

Posting Permissions

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