Page 63 of 116 FirstFirst ... 1353616263646573113 ... LastLast
Results 621 to 630 of 1157

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

  1. #621
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    We understand your reluctance to answer the question in a straightforward manner.

    So, let me ask it this way: how many predominantly same sex marriage cultures have survived vs opposite sex cultures? Same answer that you cannot bring yourself to admit. All the surviving cultures are predominantly hetero, none [zero ]are predominantly same sex.

    That means they, gay people/same sex couples survive at all only due to the having a dominant opposite sex culture. So they obviously live within the dominant culture and thus are subject to the rules of the dominant culture. Only if they were a tyrant would same sex folks get to legitimately determine the rules of the dominant culture.

    So if we are a tolerant nation, and we are, it should be understood that there have been eras and many, if not most, cultures that have not been very tolerant of what has been, and still is, a deviant/not normal conduct/behavior. Tolerance is no doubt how it should be, but that broadmindedness and forbearance should also be appreciated, be respected. With the additional provision, through means guaranteed through our Constitution, of minority rights, everyone has the right to do their best to convince a sufficient number of us in order to potentially become the wielder of the majority opinion. I agree with that, understanding that, without an amendment, all that has been adopted can also then be changed... if the people so decide.

    If that method is found insufficient by your side and then finds their only real resort is to use a court system that has been, preloaded with a canned approach, rigged in such a way that there is only one way the referee [ SC ] can make the call, no matter the will of the people, well, lets just say we have a real problem there.

    Now, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez and their likes would probably be on your side, the founders more on ours. That Government and its allied systems trump the people was not their mantra at all. Our founders would leave this up to us.

    We have different ideas on a government or culture being oppressive. Hard to be overly oppressive if you have the majority on your side... much easier to be oppressive if those making the decision has been limited to a few people making the decisions for all the rest of us.
    Name a predominantly same sex culture that has existed.

    I have never claimed that homosexuality is a ever a majority of any culture. However, there is a difference between treating people who are attracted to those of the same sex equally and those who are attracted to the same sex being the majority. Pretty sure no culture has ever been predominantly gay. However, no culture has ever been predominantly geniuses or predominantly over 6 feet tall or predominantly left-handed either.

    Actually all those people you mentioned would kill homosexuals (in all likelihood). So that would place them pretty fairly on your side. As for the founders, if they lived in our current society, the majority would be on my side. Freedom of the people was the mantra of the founders, including freedom from the whims of any majority.

    Again, you keep contradicting yourself. I show you that the majority is on my side at this moment, and you say the majority doesn't matter. Then you go back to your same old mantra of you having the majority on your side. So which is it? Does the majority only matter when it is on your side or does it not matter at all, making your attempted view on being "oppressive" completely pointless?
    "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. #622
    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
    You demand hard numbers but have never provided them yourself.
    Thanks for the notice.

    Now, where are yours?
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  3. #623
    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's a good thing nobody has suggested it means equality of everything. Is there a reason you attack this same straw man over and over? Do you think it's any more convincing now?

    Constitutional scrutiny and levels of state interest are not specifically mentioned in the constitution. Doesn't matter. SCOTUS makes decisions on how these things work, and that's what they've decided.
    Perhaps one needs to hit that same nail over and over again since it never seems to get into your head, yano?

    Sure they do. That's all good and well until they start tearing down institutions as important as family and marriage. When they use in one case an expedient to come to a decision thus painting themselves, and society, into a corner with some silly judicial rationale that worked in one or other area but now only handcuffs us where we need flexibility... well, then they have effed up and we just don't have to accept that.

    Not when its this important.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  4. #624
    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
    Name a "same sex culture."

    Then tell me how legalizing same-sex marriage makes America a "same sex culture."

    And then explain how that will cause America to cease to exist.
    Thought we had covered that, there isn't one. Nada, zilch, none...zero.

    Never said it was, oh man of straw.

    Never said that either oh man of second straw.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  5. #625
    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 tried to "explain" by using the issue of procreation, saying that an interracial couple could procreate with each other while a same sex couple cannot. You are trying to tie marriage to a positive procreative ability, which it legally isn't.

    Nothing about gender affects the actual legal requirements or issues within marriage. Legal marriage has nothing to do with the ability of those involved to have a child with each other. That is only your personal "requirement" of marriage. Meaningless to the actual legal marriage.

    You cannot show how allowing those of same sex to marry will in any way affect the stability of marriage or the protection of children. In fact, I can show that there is no correlation of those at all. Your arguments fail. Unless you want to show some actual proof or evidence of what you are trying to assert, not simply making the assertion.
    I never said that you have to specifically prove positive procreative ability, at least not on an individual basis.

    However you are wrong, one of the issues for which marriage is a part of the solution is procreation. There was no reason to have checked in the past for positive procreative powers, it had already been confirmed since before written history in gender opposite couples... there was no need to make it a perquisite or state the obvious for the group... we have seven billion people on the planet as proof, I think we get how it works.

    Legal requirements are the codification of our rules and requirements set down by our law makers to fit a culture for themselves. In England, in Chile, in Vietnam, each culture is different... they make up their own rules. As do we. All cultures have had legal marriages between males and females and why do you think this might be? If it were just for love, not for the creation of families requiring procreation, why would they not have had same sex couple marriages abundant in the past? Perhaps it was because there would be no lineal descendents issuing from such a barren situation and no need to establish legal claim? Another reason was to safeguard families from abandonment, establishing a legal bond between each parent and to the children... this is not really necessary as with couples not procreating children.

    What are your facts on marriage... why was it established in your opinion...or can you tell me factually? What has it been for here in the United States? Solely to join two lovers?

    And gender does actually affect the legal requirements if the legal requirements only allow different sex marriages, so you are wrong just on the face of it. My personal requirement? Are you serious, its been a national requirement that it be one man one woman, generally and universally understood to have procreative powers. Its your personal requirement that it doesn't have to be that way.

    You cannot show how the marriage of a man to a tree will in anyway affect the stability of marriage, or of their saplings, either. You cannot show me anything of the sort regarding whether it same sex marriage hurts the institution of marriage or of children. You are simply prevaricating. For one thing, SSM has not been around long enough to have sufficient longitudinal studies... besides, who is conducting these studies, what were the metrics...

    Takes a long long time to see if things work out for the better or worse. Example, the Head Start Program, so heralded by liberals. Its been around since LBJ and yet we just are finding out that for those going in at age 4, any gains are erased by first grade. Liberals just have such a poor record of improving much of anything.
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  6. #626
    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
    Name a predominantly same sex culture that has existed.

    I have never claimed that homosexuality is a ever a majority of any culture. However, there is a difference between treating people who are attracted to those of the same sex equally and those who are attracted to the same sex being the majority. Pretty sure no culture has ever been predominantly gay. However, no culture has ever been predominantly geniuses or predominantly over 6 feet tall or predominantly left-handed either.

    Actually all those people you mentioned would kill homosexuals (in all likelihood). So that would place them pretty fairly on your side. As for the founders, if they lived in our current society, the majority would be on my side. Freedom of the people was the mantra of the founders, including freedom from the whims of any majority.

    Again, you keep contradicting yourself. I show you that the majority is on my side at this moment, and you say the majority doesn't matter. Then you go back to your same old mantra of you having the majority on your side. So which is it? Does the majority only matter when it is on your side or does it not matter at all, making your attempted view on being "oppressive" completely pointless?
    None that I know of, so they mix, if allowed, with the dominant culture under their rules. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out.

    There is no necessity nor requirement to allow the non norm, deviance, to be equated with the norm. It would be untrue to begin with. All those you mention, they don't get to have everything changed to accomodate them. There are standard car sizes and door sizes that the tall must adjust to, we don't make everybody right-handed write with their left, or start on the opposite side of the page so its easier to write. All those outside the norm adjust to the norm, not vice versa.

    Yes indeed, these totalitarian stage liberals probably would kill homosexuals, another reason for homosexuals not to bite the hand of all that treat them so well.

    Show me the votes, actual votes, where the majority of the country is on your side. Not polls conducted by who knows who, what the actual questions were, who they were choosing to poll, etc... How about we vote on it by state, that's reasonable. If a state wants SSM, thats up to them [ you seem to be ok with that ]. If a state doesn't want it, thats up to them [ you don't seem to be okay with that, don't states get equal protection under the law?].
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  7. #627
    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
    Name a predominantly same sex culture that has existed.

    I have never claimed that homosexuality is a ever a majority of any culture. However, there is a difference between treating people who are attracted to those of the same sex equally and those who are attracted to the same sex being the majority. Pretty sure no culture has ever been predominantly gay. However, no culture has ever been predominantly geniuses or predominantly over 6 feet tall or predominantly left-handed either.

    Actually all those people you mentioned would kill homosexuals (in all likelihood). So that would place them pretty fairly on your side. As for the founders, if they lived in our current society, the majority would be on my side. Freedom of the people was the mantra of the founders, including freedom from the whims of any majority.

    Again, you keep contradicting yourself. I show you that the majority is on my side at this moment, and you say the majority doesn't matter. Then you go back to your same old mantra of you having the majority on your side. So which is it? Does the majority only matter when it is on your side or does it not matter at all, making your attempted view on being "oppressive" completely pointless?
    None that I know of, so they mix, if allowed, with the dominant culture under their rules. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out.

    There is no necessity nor requirement to allow the non norm, deviance, to be equated with the norm. It would be a lie to begin with. All those you mention, they don't get to have everything changed to accommodate them. There are standard car sizes and door sizes that the tall must adjust to, we don't make everybody right-handed write with their left, or start on the opposite side of the page so its easier to write. All those outside the norm adjust to the norm, not vice versa.

    Yes indeed, some of these totalitarian stage liberals probably would kill homosexuals, another reason for homosexuals not to bite the hand of all those that treat them so well. And you are flat out wrong in your assessment of the founders. Most were moral upstanding men, men who understood the need for regional differences, understood Federalism, many of whom understood the limits of a national government and the follies of a tyrannical court.

    Show me the votes, actual votes, where the majority of the country is on your side. Not polls conducted by who knows who, what the actual questions were, who they were choosing to poll, etc... How about we vote on it by state, that's reasonable. If a state wants SSM, thats up to them [ you seem to be ok with that ]. If a state doesn't want it, thats up to them [ you don't seem to be okay with that, don't states get equal protection under the law?].
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  8. #628
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,753

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    Hard to be overly oppressive if you have the majority on your side...
    Tell that to the Jews. Having the majority on your side can create tyranny just as easily as the other way around. Probably easier.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  9. #629
    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

    Marriage is for adults to be protected from each other and from other adults. It has little to do directly with children. Children benefit because those protections put their parents in a better position of security.

    If no one could have children, then there would be no need for marriage (although there would likely be few to actually get divorced if they were married) because we would be living in basically a "Children of Men" situation.
    Help me out here. Can you see the contradiction in these two paragraphs?

    And if that second paragraph is what you feel, then you agree that those who cannot procreate, as would be an impossibility of a same sex gender couple together, have no need for marriage, right?
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  10. #630
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,753

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    There is no necessity nor requirement to allow the non norm, deviance, to be equated with the norm. It would be untrue to begin with. All those you mention, they don't get to have everything changed to accomodate them. There are standard car sizes and door sizes that the tall must adjust to, we don't make everybody right-handed write with their left, or start on the opposite side of the page so its easier to write. All those outside the norm adjust to the norm, not vice versa.
    .
    CONFORM OR SUFFER, WEAKLINGS

    Listen to yourself, man. It's pretty freaky.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Posting Permissions

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