Page 1 of 53 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 524

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

  1. #1
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:50 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,268
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban

    The key part:

    The lawsuit alleged that Wisconsin's ban violates the plaintiffs' constitutional rights to equal protection and due process, asserting the prohibition deprives gay couples of the legal protections that married couples enjoy simply because of their gender.
    Use of the term gender instead of orientation could be important for future rulings. Have not read the ruling itself yet so take the reporting for what it is worth.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #2
    Guru
    brothern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,170
    Blog Entries
    8

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

    I can get married in my home. I can't believe it ...

  3. #3
    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 Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban

    The key part:



    Use of the term gender instead of orientation could be important for future rulings. Have not read the ruling itself yet so take the reporting for what it is worth.
    It's about time a judge figured that part out and put it in their ruling.
    "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. #4
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

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

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    It's about time a judge figured that part out and put it in their ruling.

    I don't see how gender is anymore or less important than designating the ruling based on orientation. The rulings all seem to come down to equal protection on a very minimal rational basis test. I have argued that legislation passed by states legislatures is by definition meeting the due process clause, and rational basis, as our representatives have carefully considered the legislation of banning gay marriage, and if that isn't at least meeting rational basis, I'm not sure what is? The problem, (I think) eventually will come down to whether the rationale to exclude gays in marriage (mostly the preservation of and or higher regard for heterosexual familial contributions to the state over that of gay marriage familial contributions) is rational. A great many do not, I however do think that children do best with both a biological mother and father, and both gender representations is important in ways we may not even know. I've heard the arguments against this notion, such as, single parents, broken homes, bad parents etc.. And I acknowledge that those are valid concerns, but rather than use it as a whipping boy against the virtue of perfect parents in perfect worlds (Which we do not live in and never will) I, on the other hand think that we simply need to move in directions that help strengthen families, and provide a more equal and fair system for divorcing parents allowing access to both equally as the presumption. Add in several other tweaks to marriage and domestic laws and I think we can accommodate all parties concerned.

    Call me old fashioned if you like, but although I can't put my finger on any one glaring benefit and articulate why a child is better suited for having both biological parents involved and attentive, I do KNOW it when I see it. I don't see why gays or polygamists or any other consensual relationship can't enjoy civil unions, but I think marriage should be held to a higher standard, and reserve that standing for those that perpetuate the best model for success, and that's heterosexual marriages.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  5. #5
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,359

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

    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  6. #6
    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 Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    I don't see how gender is anymore or less important than designating the ruling based on orientation. The rulings all seem to come down to equal protection on a very minimal rational basis test. I have argued that legislation passed by states legislatures is by definition meeting the due process clause, and rational basis, as our representatives have carefully considered the legislation of banning gay marriage, and if that isn't at least meeting rational basis, I'm not sure what is? The problem, (I think) eventually will come down to whether the rationale to exclude gays in marriage (mostly the preservation of and or higher regard for heterosexual familial contributions to the state over that of gay marriage familial contributions) is rational. A great many do not, I however do think that children do best with both a biological mother and father, and both gender representations is important in ways we may not even know. I've heard the arguments against this notion, such as, single parents, broken homes, bad parents etc.. And I acknowledge that those are valid concerns, but rather than use it as a whipping boy against the virtue of perfect parents in perfect worlds (Which we do not live in and never will) I, on the other hand think that we simply need to move in directions that help strengthen families, and provide a more equal and fair system for divorcing parents allowing access to both equally as the presumption. Add in several other tweaks to marriage and domestic laws and I think we can accommodate all parties concerned.

    Call me old fashioned if you like, but although I can't put my finger on any one glaring benefit and articulate why a child is better suited for having both biological parents involved and attentive, I do KNOW it when I see it. I don't see why gays or polygamists or any other consensual relationship can't enjoy civil unions, but I think marriage should be held to a higher standard, and reserve that standing for those that perpetuate the best model for success, and that's heterosexual marriages.


    Tim-
    In reality, it isn't. But it makes it much harder for the states when trying to state an interest being furthered, because sex/gender is a higher level of scrutiny than sexuality/sexual orientation. The cases are easily won with the rational basis test because states cannot come up with a legitimate interest, so far. But stating that it should (rightfully) be laws that discriminate based on gender/sex rather than sexuality, because the laws are discriminating on the basis of sex/gender, not sexuality.

    They didn't carefully consider these laws. They believe that homosexuality/same sex marriage is bad and therefore should be banned. Nothing was carefully considered there.
    "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. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    .....I however do think that children do best with both a biological mother and father, and both gender representations is important in ways we may not even know. I've heard the arguments against this notion, such as, single parents, broken homes, bad parents etc..
    And none of those concerns have ANYTHING to do with Same Sex Marriage, because whether marriage is allowed for Same Sex Couples or not they can STILL raise children regardless. So the "Oh please think of the children" excuse doesn't fly.

    Are you seriously saying that Adam and Steve being married is going to be worse than Adam and Steve the Same Sex couple in raising children? If not, your concerns don't matter because regardless they can raise children together LEGALLY whether SSM is legal or not.

    You are never going to make it illegal for gays to raise children. It simply isn't going to happen.
    Last edited by TheNextEra; 06-06-14 at 07:37 PM.

  8. #8
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    And none of those concerns have ANYTHING to do with Same Sex Marriage, because whether marriage is allowed for Same Sex Couples or not they can STILL raise children regardless. So the "Oh please think of the children" excuse doesn't fly.

    Are you seriously saying that Adam and Steve being married is going to be any different than Adam and Steve the Same Sex couple in raising children? If not, your concerns don't matter because regardless they can raise children together LEGALLY whether SSM is legal or not.

    You are never going to make it illegal for gays to raise children. It simply isn't going to happen.
    Excellent point. I exercise four mornings a week with a guy who is gay and is raising a two children from S. America with his partner. SSM isn't legal in my state, but they were married in Maryland (as I recall) and were raising the kids for years before that. Another person in this group is gay and has been with the same partner for about a decade. They own several businesses together, their house, etc. and aren't legally 'married' in Tennessee but are also now married in another state. I can't see the benefit of Tennessee denying either couple the benefits of marriage. It won't cause them to not be gay, or to not live together, or for the one couple to not raise the kids they adopted from an orphanage, etc. And it won't affect the many straight couples in our group with children, or my own marriage, and it won't bring together broken straight families, or cause any straight families to break apart.

  9. #9
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,968
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by brothern View Post
    I can get married in my home. I can't believe it ...
    Hey, congratulations, man! Welcome to equality.


    To me, your statement is what this is all about.


    Now if only my buddies in Atlanta could make this statement...someday. Soon maybe?
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Excellent point. I exercise four mornings a week with a guy who is gay and is raising a two children from S. America with his partner. SSM isn't legal in my state, but they were married in Maryland (as I recall) and were raising the kids for years before that. Another person in this group is gay and has been with the same partner for about a decade. They own several businesses together, their house, etc. and aren't legally 'married' in Tennessee but are also now married in another state. I can't see the benefit of Tennessee denying either couple the benefits of marriage. It won't cause them to not be gay, or to not live together, or for the one couple to not raise the kids they adopted from an orphanage, etc. And it won't affect the many straight couples in our group with children, or my own marriage, and it won't bring together broken straight families, or cause any straight families to break apart.
    Similar here. Two gay couples I know who raise children here in Nevada cannot get married, however, they have been together for 19 years and 14 years. The community knows them and recognizes them as the children's parents. The heterosexual parents from the school recognize them as their parents and in effect being married since they have been together for so long. AKA the parents in the community look at them as "normal. Being married is going to change none of that. The "think of the children" excuse is just the last ditch effort by the anti-SSM crowd and frankly it is disappointing because it is a failed argument.

Page 1 of 53 1231151 ... 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
  •