Page 23 of 53 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 524

Thread: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287:411]

  1. #221
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,108

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I think homosexuals should be very happy with civil unions. It's the state that might not be happy with them. Hey, in my lifetime we went from homosexuality being illegal to civil unions. What's not to be happy about that for homosexuals?
    the continuing discrimination

  2. #222
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,108

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    So in addition to being an immoral leftist, the judge is also an incorrigible moron.
    where's the immorality?

  3. #223
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I already explained it. If your claim is that sodomy laws make it illegal for homosexuals to "be themselves", then you are defining "themselves" by their sodomy. And the really strange thing is that this isn't strange. It's not strange because homosexuals do that to themselves. The only people in the world that I know of that define themselves primarily by their sexual behavior is the GLBT community. Your post merely reinforced that.
    omg it's not an either/or thing. Same sex acts are a natural extension of being homosexual, so laws against those acts are not only inhumane gestapo tactics, but make illegal acts that come naturally to that person. It's sort of like how laws against heroin and sex with one's cousin prevent conservatives from being themselves.

  4. #224
    Paying To Play
    AJiveMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    wisconSIN
    Last Seen
    05-15-15 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,775

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Update;

    Madison — A federal judge in Madison declined Monday to put gay marriages on hold in Wisconsin, leaving it for now to county officials, a federal appeals court and, possibly, state courts to decide whether same-sex unions continue around the state.
    Crabb's order Monday leaves the state divided into counties such as Dane, Milwaukee and Waukesha, where clerks are issuing same-sex marriage licenses, and counties such as Ozaukee, Washington and Racine, where they are not.

    At least 31 of Wisconsin's 72 counties issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples Monday. At least 30 declined to do so but were waiting for directions from from the attorney general's office or their corporation counsel. The remaining 11 did not respond Monday to calls from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
    Federal judge declines to stop gay marriages in Wisconsin

  5. #225
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,030

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    Definitely, but let's not give credit for accidentally 'doing the right thing' long-term either. I don't think a politician like clinton gave a rat's ass. He signed it cause it was the least risky option politically. I doubt very much he was looking forward to the SCOTUS striking down as unconstitutional his own law, near 20 years later. Same with DADT, a 'compromise' that anyone who understood what it's like to hide one's sexuality in the military would realize was not doing any favors.

    In the end it took entirely separate battles to repeal both of those
    His signing it was really just a formality anyway. It passed with enough votes in each house to make it veto-proof. He didn't actually support the bill when he signed it but it was veto-proof. It was going to pass no matter what the President did. And some people (possibly not Bill at the time, but I wouldn't put it passed Hillary) did recognize that it was very possible to end up with a Constitutional Amendment. Clinton was not proud of signing DOMA. He said that from the beginning. There was no signing ceremony or even pictures of him signing it.

    I honestly do wonder how many Democrats, and even possibly if Barr himself (Repub at the time who authored DOMA), actually were thinking ahead and supported it to avoid an Amendment rather than actually supporting the bill itself.

    DADT didn't and couldn't really do much of anything because either way there were going to be gay people in the military. It did do the one thing of keeping people from having to lie outright, especially to those who get you into the military, but given how much else had to be kept hidden, it made the avoidance of that initial lie pretty much moot.
    "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.

  6. #226
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,030

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    Gets harder to respect a process that would result in 'exceptions' to due process/equal protection. Then again that's why i'm against ballot initiatives now, cause that's what happened in most states.
    Ballot initiatives cannot happen on a federal level (not that I'm aware of).

    But we have exceptions to equal protection now based on legal precedent, level of scrutiny. We don't treat 15 year olds the same as 25 year olds and older. In fact, we have age limits that treat adults differently than other adults under some laws (drinking and even some marriage laws). I don't have a problem with the process for making Amendments at all, even if it would put in place exceptions to some Amendments. Even our Constitution isn't perfect, we're human. But I would feel that putting a place an Amendment that would define marriage a certain way constitutionally would be just plain wrong and I would fight against it. It would be worse than having Prohibition in the Constitution, and that was definitely bad enough.

    But same sex marriage is not the only place such an Amendment was tried. In the early part of the 20th Century, several attempts were made nationally to make an Amendment that would define marriage as only a man and woman of the same race. Luckily then too, all of those attempts failed.
    "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.

  7. #227
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    I honestly do wonder how many Democrats, and even possibly if Barr himself (Repub at the time who authored DOMA), actually were thinking ahead and supported it to avoid an Amendment rather than actually supporting the bill itself.

    DADT didn't and couldn't really do much of anything because either way there were going to be gay people in the military. It did do the one thing of keeping people from having to lie outright, especially to those who get you into the military, but given how much else had to be kept hidden, it made the avoidance of that initial lie pretty much moot.
    Well but in the end the amendment was voted on, so DOMA didn't prevent that apparently. It seems too separate to me, not affecting the individual states at all.

    DADT led to like 12k soldiers being kicked out of the military. Some weren't even gay and lied to get out. If you read the actual policy pamphlets they gave to recruits, they were a complete joke and recommended spying on others' use of porn and such and finding other ways to interrogate. "Don't ask" was never enforced once training started and not at all realistic in military culture. Of course they would be asked about their girls back home etc.

  8. #228
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Ballot initiatives cannot happen on a federal level (not that I'm aware of).
    No, but they violated the 14th just the same when they passed bans against SSM.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    But we have exceptions to equal protection now based on legal precedent, level of scrutiny. We don't treat 15 year olds the same as 25 year olds and older. In fact, we have age limits that treat adults differently than other adults under some laws (drinking and even some marriage laws).
    Right, if it satisfies strict scrutiny/compelling government interest. That was the whole argument over affirmative action for example. Those are rational debates at least. The courts and govt allowing and encouraging SSM bans was always nothing but theocratic nightmare with the ballot process turned into merely a quantification of bigotry throughout the population. Shameful all around

  9. #229
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Right. That's why he was whining. I mean "dissenting." His rants in decisions about homosexuality are always entertaining. Ironically, his dissents have just served to provide more ammunition for the equality side.
    Yeah i think one time he dissented "many people do not want homosexuals as their neighbors, coworkers blahblah" as if that's a legal argument. Last time i ever read anything from that pig

  10. #230
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,030

    re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    Well but in the end the amendment was voted on, so DOMA didn't prevent that apparently. It seems too separate to me, not affecting the individual states at all.

    DADT led to like 12k soldiers being kicked out of the military. Some weren't even gay and lied to get out. If you read the actual policy pamphlets they gave to recruits, they were a complete joke and recommended spying on others' use of porn and such and finding other ways to interrogate. "Don't ask" was never enforced once training started and not at all realistic in military culture. Of course they would be asked about their girls back home etc.
    It was voted on years later (I believe it was in 2004 and 2006), after there was a marked increase in support for same sex marriage and a huge loss in support for the Amendment. There were very few Democrats willing to vote for the Amendment (34), and even about as many Republicans voted against it (27) (in 2006). It didn't make it through the Senate either time it went up to them.

    Before DADT, there were tons not allowed in or being kicked out for not only being gay but also lying on their entry paperwork because there was an actual form that people signed that said you weren't homosexual when you joined.

    I joined in 1998. We got no such forms and in fact, even with DADT in place, there was a difference in the treatment of gays (from what I have found out, from both personal accounts and information about it) before and after DADT was put into effect. DADT needed to go, absolutely, so that gays could serve openly, but I don't think it made anything worse for gay military members serving than what existed prior to it being put into place. I'm not saying it made it much better, but it did not make it worse for most.

    Now, on a military retention level, it was an issue because it allowed for some people to have an out by simply claiming they were gay. This one I witnessed personally during school. In fact, after having several students from my class (which started at around 600+ students) sign paperwork claiming they were gay within just a couple of weeks, our Master Chief for our class got us all together and told us that if one more person tried it, he was going to make that person call home and tell their mother/father right there in his office that he/she was gay. It was pretty obvious that DADT was being used to get out of the Navy because the school had gotten too hard for them, at least some of them.
    "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.

Page 23 of 53 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... 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
  •