Page 41 of 116 FirstFirst ... 3139404142435191 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 410 of 1157

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

  1. #401
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,944

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    Well, since we are going for silliness... how would you then apply the 14th, or even decide whether it is applicable? Lets say to something that does not exist, or does not yet exist. Or perhaps you may apply to the empty space that exists between the planets... or maybe the space left unused between some folks' ears?

    Its definitely a quandary, eh? But go ahead, give us an example... I am not unreasonable, convince me.
    Courts do not decide the constitutionality of any law until a person actually is able to show the courts that they are in fact affected by said law in some way. That means if a law doesn't exist (or is not being enforced), it cannot be challenged.
    "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.

  2. #402
    User Lonely Eternity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Last Seen
    05-03-16 @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    76

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    Neither the 14th amendment or anything else in the U.S. constitution supports the oxymoronic "gay marriage" any more than it supports forcing dog owners to let cat-owners enter their cats in a dog show.

    What the constitution supports is preventing dog-owners from banning cat-owners from having cat shows, and, analogously likewise, preventing states from not allowing same-sex domestic partnership civil unions called "homarriage" or the like for same-sex couples as states have allowed opposite-sex domestic partnership civil unions called "marriage".

    You misunderstand the entire issue.
    The problem with this comparison is that you are comparing two different species. The last time I check, we are all of the same species. The exception being that some of us are purebred and others are simply mutts not elligible for the show.

  3. #403
    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 Deuce View Post
    It affects them. It affects individual liberty. And the burden is on you, not me. Tie goes to personal freedom.

    It wasn't a fair question. There isn't an answer, and I knew that when I asked it. It doesn't affect you. When asked this question straight-up, even the lawyers hired to defend Prop 8 couldn't identify any harm caused by same-sex marriage. They couldn't explain how marriage or society was being eroded or harmed. They had nothing. And their job was to have that answer. Why should I expect you to have one?

    I apologize for asking. I knew you couldn't answer, it wasn't fair.
    It affects all of us [there are a heck of a lot more of us heteros ], it affects me [ cannot help this sinking feeling about America, the ill-omened paths it is being directed down ]. So, there absolutely is no tie, besides this isn't baseball, we aren't base running. The burden is not on the side that is content with the way things are... it is on you, those who want the change things, those who will benefit.

    There are a million paper cuts, assaults on American culture and the American spirit, that are destroying what was once a strong and proud country... the injury with SSM is one of the larger, this being a deep cut, the wound directly to the strength of America, its traditional family stability, slicing constantly deeper. We know this is not where it will stop... this is but the cliff where the cascading will begin. You tell me, using the 14th after this, what will be a good reason to stop anybody from marrying just about anybody or anything? Give me a logic end point to that...

    Then, when what was strong all collapses from the weaknesses inflicted by all these constant assaults of failed liberal ideology, where then does one go to seek OUR remedy... from you, perhaps? No. All will be equally lost just because We could never say no to anything.

    Looking back we should have never compromised, never said we would tolerate such conduct in the first place... our toleration has not been met with any appreciation, much less reciprocal toleration, just the desire for more and more and then more...

    Waaah wah wah...Quit with the crocodile tears. You are not hurt by SSM not being accepted, loves are in no way discontinued just because two are unable to marry in the eyes of the law... many heteros in fact prefer it that way. So lets get over the idea of grievous injury, its silly and overly maudlin. Have your own ceremony if desired, live together, do as you please just don't ask the rest of us to accept, to be forced to accept, that which we loathe to even think very much about in any detail.

    Sorry, saying its normal just does not make it so... will not make it all better and we cannot be just forced into accepting something we do not accept. Case closed.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  4. #404
    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
    We, the people, include people like me, whether you like that fact or not. People who support legalizing same sex marriages because you nor people like you have any real state interest being served by restricting people of the same sex from getting married. And it includes those "rickety courts" ensuring that the rights of the minority (especially a minority that is only a "minority" due to a vote from years ago and the slow way that politics works in general) are upheld over the whims and moral judgements of a majority at any given time.
    Well, then let WE the people decide... not the courts saying We the people can only decide in the way the court will allow...right? You cannot deny that, can you? Not and maintain any degree of intellectual honesty, you can't. You and your people will just have to abide by what me and my people have to say in concert with all the rest of those concerned and unconcerned.

    So, get off your high horse and start using your minority rights, speech, press, assembly, petition... and persuade us. And if We remain unconvinced and you don't like our decision, tough beans. If the decision goes the other way, tough beans for my side... but we won't stop and, if there is a country worth living in to be salvaged, we won't lose.

    Your position against morals and moral judgements is a telling one for the future...who needs them right? We can live with lying, cheating, stealing... all morals are passe', no longer fashionable and were just silliness on the part of the upstanding...
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  5. #405
    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 Lursa View Post
    Well you can blame the Constitution for that. Gender discrimination is a no-no. And that is what the courts are determining that denying SSM is.
    Just where is this gender discrimination? All genders have the same rights, all, if they want to marry, have to marry one of the opposite sex... that is equal for all genders. What do you not get about that?
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  6. #406
    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
    You do not have a majority of states, no matter what you may believe, not for a US Constitutional Amendment.

    First of all, you would need not just the states but also Congress unless you can get a Constitutional Convention setup (which is highly unlikely just for same sex marriage/FMA). And Bush tried in 2004/2006 and failed to get two through Congress then. Do you really think there are more in support of a Federal Marriage Amendment now?

    Federal Marriage Amendment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    Second, most of the votes for those state amendments banning same sex marriage were taken more than 6 years ago. Since that time, marriage for same sex couples has been voted in by popular vote of three states and could easily pass in more (especially most of those that already have it legal through other means). But, the people don't vote directly for Constitutional Amendments, but rather the state legislatures do. That means it would come down to their makeup. They are about evenly spread, but they certainly do not have enough for 75% (the number really needed to pass a Constitutional Amendment). This means that you would need 38 (possibly 37, not sure if they round up or not) to pass.

    Laurence Watts: Could a Constitutional Amendment Banning Same-Sex Marriage Be Passed?

    https://www.statescape.com/resources...rtysplits.aspx

    You don't have the votes and with most Democrats and Independents and even some Republicans supporting same sex marriage, a Federal Marriage Amendment is not likely to happen.
    Wasn't talking US Constitutional Amendment.

    And its 38 states needed, the ERA only got 35 and was defeated by not obtaining the necessary 3 additional. Thanks for all the effort anyhow, maybe someone else out there might learn from it. I have taught these things, so am aware.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  7. #407
    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
    Courts do not decide the constitutionality of any law until a person actually is able to show the courts that they are in fact affected by said law in some way. That means if a law doesn't exist (or is not being enforced), it cannot be challenged.
    Again, I am totally familiar with the concept...need to explain it to the other guy. The 14th was not in its being an expansion of rights, it guaranteed equal protection under the laws.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  8. #408
    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 CriticalThought View Post
    Nada.
    Unable... or just unwilling?
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  9. #409
    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=Lursa;1063067526]
    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang
    Sure you can. As long as you don't try to suppress other peoples Rights. Just like its always been.



    Good. Just let us know when your rights are being suppressed and we will fight for that too.
    Yeah, right.

    Maybe you can help me, and the rest of America, with all these folks wanting to ruin our culture with their ideas of forcing SSM on us then? I am sure you will be on board with that, right?
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  10. #410
    User Lonely Eternity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Last Seen
    05-03-16 @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    76

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

    [QUOTE=Gaugingcatenate;1063067941]
    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Yeah, right.

    Maybe you can help me, and the rest of America, with all these folks wanting to ruin our culture with their ideas of forcing SSM on us then? I am sure you will be on board with that, right?
    So exactly when did they turn in a mandate that everyone must marry someone of the same gender?

Page 41 of 116 FirstFirst ... 3139404142435191 ... 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
  •