Page 10 of 17 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 164

Thread: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

  1. #91
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Actually, states see free speech cases too. They just aren't talked about as much as those that go the federal route.

    In fact, it was state court decisions on same sex marriage violating state constitutions that led to at least some of the state amendments stating marriage is between a man and a woman only. Baehr v Miike, a state of Hawaii supreme court decision that stated not issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples was discriminatory, was actually one of the main catalysts for DOMA. It was a California state court decision that led to Prop 8.
    from what is stated, under constitutional law of the founders.

    it should be rare for a citizen to ever be in a federal court.

    because under constitutional law, the federal government [congress ]only has authority over 4 classes of citizens...they are listed in the constitution

    citizens were meant to argue their rights in state courts, ....with the citizen able to petition the federal government to hear their case, if they felt the state had not given them justice.

    today everyone always talks about the bill of rights on the federal level, instead of the states declaration of rights.

    marriage as i stated before.......whether you believe marriage is a natural right or a civil right.......you cannot use a right on another citizen ONLY ON GOVERNMENT, CAN YOU EXERCISE A RIGHT ON.

    you cannot use a natural right against a natural right , to force getting a license.

    you cannot use a civil right against a natural right to force getting a license.

  2. #92
    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 Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    that was a sight error in my post, ..did not mean to say run, as in the big picture, ..but run as in instituting a law...i said in republican forms....you cannot have referendums...that is direct democracy, giving the people power to vote directly on issues,. like the Athens did...the founders hate that form of government and constructed the constitution [federalism] to prevent that...hence the guarantee.
    Plenty of other countries with republican forms of government include referendums.

    Republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    We were the first ones to define republic as not using direct democracy at all. And that definition was not actually enshrined in the Constitution itself, at least not in a way that limits the states to allow the people to vote on some issues.

    List of Swiss federal referendums - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Referendum dates and results - Australian Electoral Commission
    Referendums held in the UK - UK Parliament

    Personally, as I've said, I disagree with ballot initiatives and/or referendums. However, I also recognize that they are not truly prohibited by the US Constitution, at least not on a state level. But then, both sides use referendums. In fact, the biggest argument being used right now to support bans on same sex marriage is that the people voted them in place. (Not a valid argument anyway, since whether voted in by the people or their representatives, makes no difference in whether those laws should be struck down as violating the US Constitution. It is still a law being enacted by the state/the majority that violates rights of others or part of the US Constitution.)
    "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. #93
    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 Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    from what is stated, under constitutional law of the founders.

    it should be rare for a citizen to ever be in a federal court.

    because under constitutional law, the federal government [congress ]only has authority over 4 classes of citizens...they are listed in the constitution

    citizens were meant to argue their rights in state courts, ....with the citizen able to petition the federal government to hear their case, if they felt the state had not given them justice.

    today everyone always talks about the bill of rights on the federal level, instead of the states declaration of rights.

    marriage as i stated before.......whether you believe marriage is a natural right or a civil right.......you cannot use a right on another citizen ONLY ON GOVERNMENT, CAN YOU EXERCISE A RIGHT ON.

    you cannot use a natural right against a natural right , to force getting a license.

    you cannot use a civil right against a natural right to force getting a license.
    Your argument makes no sense. The government issues licenses for marriage. The government recognizes marriages as legal or not. So it is the government that is denying the right to marry to some citizens based on their relative sexes/genders. This is why the court cases are being challenged against the government.

    And the state constitutional amendments on same sex marriage (or defining marriage as between a man and a woman only) is why they are going to federal court. Because they can't violate the state constitution if the thing being challenged is in the state constitution but violating the US Constitution.
    "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.

  4. #94
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Plenty of other countries with republican forms of government include referendums.

    Republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    We were the first ones to define republic as not using direct democracy at all. And that definition was not actually enshrined in the Constitution itself, at least not in a way that limits the states to allow the people to vote on some issues.

    List of Swiss federal referendums - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Referendum dates and results - Australian Electoral Commission
    Referendums held in the UK - UK Parliament

    Personally, as I've said, I disagree with ballot initiatives and/or referendums. However, I also recognize that they are not truly prohibited by the US Constitution, at least not on a state level. But then, both sides use referendums. In fact, the biggest argument being used right now to support bans on same sex marriage is that the people voted them in place. (Not a valid argument anyway, since whether voted in by the people or their representatives, makes no difference in whether those laws should be struck down as violating the US Constitution. It is still a law being enacted by the state/the majority that violates rights of others or part of the US Constitution.)
    this is what you and others do not understand:

    the founders constructed our republic on the roman republic....power is divided.........there is no concentrated power...... as democracy creates

    to the founders a democratic republic is a oxymoron...no such thing existed in 1787

    but during the French revolution of 1789, the french people overthrew the king and the aristocracy, ...this was a democratic movement, and the new government of France called itself a republic....this was false.

    however the word republic "stuck" and today the modern interpretation of the word means " anything other than a monarchy."

    in a true republic, ...its is not a democratic FORM of government....a republic only has 1 single element of democracy in it......Americas' government being the HOUSE....WHICH IS DEMOCRATIC.........the senate and the presidency is not a democratic body.

    our republic is CLASSICAL REPUBLIC

    Classical definition of republic - Definition | WordIQ.com

    The American Republic

    The history of mixed government in America goes back to the chief founders of New England. The early Massachusetts government was predominantly aristocratic. John Cotton and John Winthrop had an aversion to democracy. The Puritan preachers strongly believed that Scriptures only approved monarchy and aristocracy. "At best, Winthrop and his friends believed in what they called 'a mixt aristocracy'". 24 (See section below on "Occurrences of the word".)

    When the Articles of Confederation failed, a constitutional convention was convened to bring about a better form of federal government on 25 May 1787. Well schooled in the Classics, the convention members had a deep distrust of democracy. Governor Robert Morris of Pennsylvania believed that the Senate should be an aristocratic body composed of rich men holding office for life. Elbridge Gerry, a delegate from Massachusetts, declared that he "abhorred" democracy as "the worst of all political evils". Edmund Randolph, the governor of Virginia, believed that Virginia's Senate was designed as check against the tendencies of democracy. John Dickinson, another delegate, strongly urged that the United States Senate would be structured as nearly as possible to the House of Lords. 25 Finally, Alexander Hamilton wanted the American government to mirror the British government and also proposed that the Senate be styled along the same lines as the House of Lords. 26

    Woodrow Wilson, in Division and Reunion (pg 12), wrote that "The Federal government was not by intention a democratic government. In plan and in structure it had been meant to check the sweep and power of popular majorities..." 27 Professor John D. Hicks in his book on The Federal Union said "Such statements could be multiplied almost at will." 28

    "All agreed that society was divided along class lines and the "'the most common and durable source of factions'" was "'the various and unequal distribution of property'", as Madison wrote in Federalist No. 10. The common philosophy accepted by most of the delegates was that of balanced government. They wanted to construct a national government in which no single interest would dominate the others. Since the men in Philadelphia represented groups alarmed by the tendencies of the agrarian interests to interfere with property, they were primarily concerned with balancing the government in the direction of protection for property and business."
    Last edited by Master PO; 05-14-14 at 11:58 AM.

  5. #95
    Guru
    1750Texan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Southcental Texas
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,569

    Re: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    you would be correct IF we were operating on the constitution and how it was meant to be used.

    because the USSC has deemed the federal bills of rights, as the supreme rights document.....state constitutions concerning rights....have turned into second bananas.

    how many people do you know who say....."my right to speech has been violated by my state", and then seek state resolution to that violation...NO they run directly to the 1st amendment.

    states are suppose to be a republican form of government, ...so that direct democracy can NEVER be used.......as a majority vote on people rights..........that is why the founders did not create a democracy...but a republic...of divided power
    It was not the USSC that deemed the Constitution as the supreme law...It was the states that agreed to that. Each sent representatives to sign the document ratifing each and every section and amendment of the constitution as supreme over all other laws.


  6. #96
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Your argument makes no sense. The government issues licenses for marriage. The government recognizes marriages as legal or not. So it is the government that is denying the right to marry to some citizens based on their relative sexes/genders. This is why the court cases are being challenged against the government.

    And the state constitutional amendments on same sex marriage (or defining marriage as between a man and a woman only) is why they are going to federal court. Because they can't violate the state constitution if the thing being challenged is in the state constitution but violating the US Constitution.

    government ITSELF cannot deny you has a citizen your RIGHTS, they have to marry you...the state does........but you cannot exercise your rights on top of another citizen...because he has rights....

    if i have a natural right........can you use your natural right and force me, to do something for you over my natural right?........you are threatening me!

    you have a civil right[ which government gives out and honors only]........can you use your civil right and force me, to do something for you over my natural right?......you are threatening me!

    by direct democracy the people of the state, they have use a democratic vote, to take away the marriage right of citiznes, which would be preformed by the state, or those willing to perform the service...........what do we have here.......majority rule!.....ruling over people rights.

    the founders wanted NO majority rule!

  7. #97
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,721

    Re: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    It is a somewhat important distinction since orientation would probably fall under Rational Basis Review, while gender falls under Intermediate Scrutiny.
    I'm not convinced it's all that important because I don't think same sex marriage bans can pass rational basis either. The state interest identified is usually procreation, and I'm not sure how someone can rationally believe same sex marriage bans create more babies.
    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.

  8. #98
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,566

    Re: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    My father lives in Gaston County. In fact, most of my father's family is from Gaston County. I was raised mainly in Cleveland County but spent part of my early childhood in a small town in Gaston.
    Hell, we may even be related. Small world.

  9. #99
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,721

    Re: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    if you give 1 person all power...he will become a king, and a tyrant

    if you give a few people all the power they will become and oligarchy, and rule the people like they are serfs

    if you give the people all power , the 51% will control the 49% and rule over them taking away their rights......history has shown this to be true.

    So you divide power into 2 half's, and no one has all the power to become a tyrant...because they don't have all power

    everything i said is true about progressive in their early movement.
    Try to stick to the topic. Two dudes getting married is not tyranny.
    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.

  10. #100
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by 1750Texan View Post
    It was not the USSC that deemed the Constitution as the supreme law...It was the states that agreed to that. Each sent representatives to sign the document ratifing each and every section and amendment of the constitution as supreme over all other laws.
    the bill of rights did not apply to states until after the civil war by.... USSC RULING....states did not obey the bill of rights because the restrictions by it are only federal.

    by the USSC ruling states had to obey it....it placed NEW restrictions on states...THEY NEVER HAD BEFORE.

    state could regulate firearms before the ruling...now they cant according to constitutional law..its prohibited.

Page 10 of 17 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... 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
  •