Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 161

Thread: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

  1. #101
    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: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    This same logic was applied to interracial marriage bans.
    Well duh of course, but they still had to be male and female, no matter what color they were. This is not the same argument because I could easily say that black men cannot marry black men or white men, or pink men, and black women cannot marry black women, or white women, or pink women. Now what legal genius? What is the gender being protected against? Discrimination, right? Well how are either men or women being unequally discriminated against? The fact that there is discrimination is not the question, of course there is, the question is does society have a rational reason to do so? In the case of interracial marriage it did not. Adding another layer to interracial marriage like gender is what it is. Adding another layer to the legal question. Blacks can marry whites, but blacks can't marry whites or blacks or pinks of the same gender. God do you people make a living out of muddying the waters?


    Tim-

    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

  2. #102
    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: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    The other characteristics dodge doesn't work even in the unconstitutional and wonky system of protected classes the SCOTUS ginned up. "Other characteristics" isn't one of the protected classes, the classes the SCOTUS is willing to rewrite the constitution for. Neither is sexual orientation as much as you may like it to be. Gender is, but you can't get to where you want on that horse.

    It's a state licensing issue and it only has to comport with the state's constitution.
    Everyone is protected under the law. It is the government that cannot treat people unequally with laws or restrict what we can do without showing that doing so furthers a legitimate state interest. Hair color is not a protected class, but it would still violate the US Constitution, specifically the 14th Amendment to make a law that treated people differently because of their hair color.

    State licenses and recognized relationships and contracts (all of which come into play in regard to marriages) are still covered under the US Constitution, despite what you want to believe. The state cannot tell someone they cannot get a fishing license because their eyes are blue, or they cannot be licensed to drive a car because they are 5'3"-5'8" tall. These all violate the EPC of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, as do marriage restrictions based on sex/gender. This is because the states cannot show how such restrictions further a legitimate state interest.
    "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. #103
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,709

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Well duh of course, but they still had to be male and female, no matter what color they were. This is not the same argument because I could easily say that black men cannot marry black men or white men, or pink men, and black women cannot marry black women, or white women, or pink women. Now what legal genius? What is the gender being protected against? Discrimination, right? Well how are either men or women being unequally discriminated against? The fact that there is discrimination is not the question, of course there is, the question is does society have a rational reason to do so? In the case of interracial marriage it did not. Adding another layer to interracial marriage like gender is what it is. Adding another layer to the legal question. Blacks can marry whites, but blacks can't marry whites or blacks or pinks of the same gender. God do you people make a living out of muddying the waters?


    Tim-

    Tim-
    Situation 1) Everyone can marry someone of the same race
    Situation 2) Everyone can marry someone of the opposite gender.

    Explain why 1 is unconstitutional, but 2 is acceptable. Explain that rational reason of yours. Because you are absolutely right. The question is whether society, and the government, have a rational reason in doing so. In the case of a distinction of gender, that test is that the measure is "substantially related" to an "important state interest."

    So, name the interest.
    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.

  4. #104
    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: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Wow. Now that's ****in authoritarian right there. "You have to prove why you should have a right" is pretty antithetical to American values.
    Is that what you got from my post? That you have to prove you have a right? All I said is that for a court to decide on a right that was not previously recognized, it must decide whether the right exists, and in this case it does (Marriage in general) and whether limiting that right to a specific group has any basis in rationale. I think it does..

    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. #105
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Summerwind View Post
    1.)All I'm agreeing to is that having government not handle marriage as an exclusive contract, as suggested by another poster
    2.) then SSM issue could be solved as well.
    3.)I'm sorry you don't like it when I agree with a different point of view.
    4.)However, it is not outside the realm of the discussion of creating equality for SS and OS marriages.
    5.)One can either upgrade SS or downgrade OS, either achieves the same thing, equality.
    1.) it will always be one in some fashion like all contracts
    2.) that doesnt solve SSM
    3.) i like when you make stuff up its funny LMAO. who said i dont like it or that you even agree with a different view point. Per what i was actually discussing i was talking facts, nothing else. lol
    4.) no thats not outside the realm, your suggestion or the others done do that nor can some of them even be done.
    5.) well this proves you don't understand how rights works, the solution is we just simply stop denying equal rights to a group of people that are currently being denied rights. Thats no upgrade or downgrade.

    also it can easily be argued that and REAL downgrade is not equality.

    again government will always be involved, and this is about equal rights, this is the topic lmao
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #106
    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: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Situation 1) Everyone can marry someone of the same race
    Situation 2) Everyone can marry someone of the opposite gender.

    Explain why 1 is unconstitutional, but 2 is acceptable. Explain that rational reason of yours.

    Huh? They are both legal? But I think I know what you meant.

    Because race and gender have no material similarities concerning marriage. They ARE different matters to adjudicate.

    Next question.

    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

  7. #107
    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: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Summerwind View Post
    yeah, but in reality there is very little "reality" to a marriage contract as they are allowed now, it's all pretty vague and married people are treated differently legally with tax benefits and other estate type benefits that are not inherent in any other contract and instead must be detailed within the contract specifically. I'm suggesting that "marriage" should be treated like any other contract, with details and no particular government benefits just because of the contract. If a wife is a dependent then taxably she'd be handled that way, if she isn't a dependent and has her own income then she files separately, and the higher income earner has the children as dependents. The idea that just because you're married you should pay less tax doesn't seem right particularly when even single income couples tend to have a better income/expense ratio per person than a single person.
    This is why marriage really isn't a contract. It is a recognition of legal kinship, very similar to a birth certificate or adoption record. Then that kinship is what provides those benefits or other privileges or rights because many different forms of kinship provide many of the same rights/benefits/privileges. Why? Because we view our kin as people who automatically deserve to be treated better in relation to our legal affairs than other, nonlegally related people, given special consideration, because family is important to us. Now, people are free, at least to a point, to make up legal contracts that exclude their legal relatives or at least specific legal relatives from certain privileges, but most people want the government to recognize that special relationship of kinship, which is why we do.
    "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.

  8. #108
    Hot Flash Mama
    Summerwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Last Seen
    01-23-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,010

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Why? Marriage is a net good to society and is therefore being encouraged and rewarded by society. That will never stop. It's only the wingnuts who can't get laid who don't like that some people get more than they do because they bother to legally entangle their lives with another person.
    I disagree. I don't see marriage as a net good or a net bad. And I don't see demonizing or attempting to humiliate single people by claiming they are defective. There aren't enough men to go around so some women are going to be single. It costs more to be single, so it makes no sense to offer the more cost effective situation tax breaks. It also doesn't make sense to exclude other non-sexual partnerships that are otherwise equally financially dependent, such as a woman and her adult daughter, who rely on each other's incomes and co-habitation to assure bills are paid and life is halfway comfortable.

    Thank you for your careless bit of bs about singles. It is discouraging to see you be that person.
    jallman: "It's all good. At least you have a thick skin and can take being poked fun back at without crying. "

  9. #109
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Situation 1) Everyone can marry someone of the same race
    Situation 2) Everyone can marry someone of the opposite gender.

    Explain why 1 is unconstitutional, but 2 is acceptable. Explain that rational reason of yours. Because you are absolutely right. The question is whether society, and the government, have a rational reason in doing so. In the case of a distinction of gender, that test is that the measure is "substantially related" to an "important state interest."

    So, name the interest.
    shhhhh don't use facts to destroy nonsense
    you will be told that its magically different and that it wasn't the same thing (even though there are court rullings that directly refer to this)

    just like it wasnt discriminatory for minorities when they could drink out of water fountains, just not THESE water fountains

    the straw men of its already equal and its not a rights issue and its not like interracial marriage have all been debunked many moons ago.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  10. #110
    Hot Flash Mama
    Summerwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Last Seen
    01-23-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,010

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    This is why marriage really isn't a contract. It is a recognition of legal kinship, very similar to a birth certificate or adoption record. Then that kinship is what provides those benefits or other privileges or rights because many different forms of kinship provide many of the same rights/benefits/privileges. Why? Because we view our kin as people who automatically deserve to be treated better in relation to our legal affairs than other, nonlegally related people, given special consideration, because family is important to us. Now, people are free, at least to a point, to make up legal contracts that exclude their legal relatives or at least specific legal relatives from certain privileges, but most people want the government to recognize that special relationship of kinship, which is why we do.
    Thank you for your response. It definitely puts it in a different light than I had been doing. I will ponder it.
    jallman: "It's all good. At least you have a thick skin and can take being poked fun back at without crying. "

Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... 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
  •