Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 161

Thread: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

  1. #61
    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 Cephus View Post
    Some do, some don't. Lots of people stamp the label LIBERTARIAN on their forehead and don't agree with anyone else with that label.
    very true, and id say this is true of all parties.
    In REAL life the libertarians i know arent like the vast majority here.
    Maybe its because of their lower numbers but yes they seem the most . . . . .uhm . . . unique and independent then other parties here

    but then again that is my whole personal problem with parties, IMO its stupid to try and define people/parties that way.

    I am me and thats why Im an independant.

    fiscally conservative
    want a strong military
    care about rights (pro-choice, pro-gun, pro SSM)
    and many other things that dont allow me to fit any of the "stereotypical" labels and thats fine by me because im not going to change for a label
    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

  2. #62
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Some do, some don't. Lots of people stamp the label LIBERTARIAN on their forehead and don't agree with anyone else with that label.
    Nobody pulls a No True Scotsman like libertarians.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    No, the legislature decides what is legal when it makes laws. The courts either uphold the law or dismiss the law as a violation of some other law, in this case they seem to suggest thus far that the "violation" by not creating a right that does not exist is in direct contradiction to the US Constitution, specifically the Due Process clause, and 14th Amendment. What I'm saying is that the USSC court can boot this back to the legislatures based on my simple argument above. These courts all seem to think that they can create a right, in-law, by inference. The inference is that gays are being unfairly treated based on their gender, yet, as I've demonstrated, both men and women are equally limited by their gender. In short, there is no violation of Due process (State and or Federal Legislative authority to decide laws) nor is there any violation of the 14th Amendment. If both men and women are equally limited, there is no gender discrimination, and thus gays must prove that it is more than just gender that defines their inequitable treatment.

    I think they'll have a hard time on that point since sexual orientation is not a protected class.

    Tim-
    Let's start with the easy one. By the time this is all done, it's quite likely that sexual orientation will be a protected class. Second, SSM bans have thus far been struck down on the basis that they don't even meet the rational basis test, so it doesn't even have to be a protected class. The bans simply violate people's general liberty interest for no useful purpose. Third, please see the ninth amendment (currently in my sig) for why saying "the right doesn't exist" is always wrong. You need to say that the right shouldn't exist, and then say why. Every right exists barring a sufficient reason why it shouldn't. Fourth, the bit about "it's not discrimination because neither gender can marry someone of the same gender" was stupid a decade ago, it's still stupid now. We already have a precedent that such an argument is nonsense in the striking down of interracial marriage bans. Lastly, I'm starting to doubt that this will ever go to the supreme court. I don't think it will ever have to. Every single case has been decided the same way. I can't imagine the supreme court even taking the appeal.

    Lastly, I don't think you understand how due process works, and I have no interest in explaining it to you for anything less than $150/hour.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati




    Thread after thread about gay marriage and racism.

    This stuff should have been worked out decades ago.

    When will this childish nonsense end?


    Any sane, consenting adults should be allowed to marry AND no one is inferior or should be given ANY favouritism strictly due to the melanin content of their skin.

    DUH

  4. #64
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,710

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    The federal government can indeed stop adding benefits onto state contracts. That is what is being proposed.
    Allowing SSM is a 'benefit?'

    How so?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  5. #65
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,710

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Once again, there is no federal marriage "right". That is something made up out of whole cloth by the SCOTUS. If the federal benefits weren't at stake, the whole rights argument put forth thus far goes away. The feds can benefit those who support others through tax relief just as they do through marriage now, without having to muggle around with the state contract of marriage.
    OK, but if it offers those benefits and legal protections in marriage, then it is discrimination to deny them to gays that want to marry.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  6. #66
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,710

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Unfortunately you are probably right.
    Is there a reason it needs to be set in stone? Black and white?

    Should there be no room in our legal codes, institutions, protections, contracts for growth in society? Change?

    Does 'one size fits all' work for decades? A hundred years? More?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  7. #67
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    So is that why you got married for those reasons? I don't think so. So why do you assume the majority do?
    Why do you assume I'm married?

    I would never get legally married...... I don't need the government to authenticate my love for a woman... As a Catholic I will take religious vows but screw the state...

    Besides, if things don't work out you're not going to be caught up in a legal mess lol...

    This is just my personal philosophy - people can do what makes them happy - which is why I'm opposed to government getting involved in any individuals personal business.

  8. #68
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,710

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    No, you tried to slide one over. It's not "a distinction of gender" but a distinction of sexual orientation - and that is not a protected class.
    Yes it is about gender because it prevents 2 people of the same gender from entering into a particular contract.

    A straight couple doesnt have to be in love or attracted to marry, neither does a gay couple.

    It's not about the straight couple's orientation either legally (in the context of your statement).
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  9. #69
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,710

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    since sexual orientation is not a protected class.

    Tim-
    It is in some states.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  10. #70
    Educator Amandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Delaware
    Last Seen
    06-19-15 @ 02:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    905
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 4 states face gay marriage showdown in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    No, the legislature decides what is legal when it makes laws. The courts either uphold the law or dismiss the law as a violation of some other law,
    Actually, they are ruling because it is a violation of the Constitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    in this case they seem to suggest thus far that the "violation" by not creating a right that does not exist is in direct contradiction to the US Constitution, specifically the Due Process clause, and 14th Amendment. What I'm saying is that the USSC court can boot this back to the legislatures based on my simple argument above. These courts all seem to think that they can create a right, in-law, by inference. The inference is that gays are being unfairly treated based on their gender, yet, as I've demonstrated, both men and women are equally limited by their gender. In short, there is no violation of Due process (State and or Federal Legislative authority to decide laws) nor is there any violation of the 14th Amendment. If both men and women are equally limited, there is no gender discrimination, and thus gays must prove that it is more than just gender that defines their inequitable treatment.

    I think they'll have a hard time on that point since sexual orientation is not a protected class.

    Tim-
    Men and women arent equally limited since they are being limited from marrying different groups of people. Limiting the same is limiting men or women both from marrying children; that is the same. However, they are ruling according to what a person can do not what they cant do. If women can marry men then men should be able to marry men. So far it appears the courts agree with us.

Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... 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
  •