Page 22 of 56 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 557

Thread: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

  1. #211
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,057

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Would it not be workable for some reason?
    Marriage recognition is related to property ownership, child custody, insurance law, banking law, inheritance law etc. Unless you plan on rewriting most of the laws which depend on marriage, a state (at any level) not recognizing marriage is not 'workable' or for that matter realistic.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  2. #212
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    of what, being overturned? Good luck proving that one
    SCOTUS has a long history of making unconstitutional rulings. If you are going to start impeaching justices for failing to uphold the Constitution you have to impeach every last person on the bench in SCOTUS.

  3. #213
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Marriage recognition is related to property ownership, child custody, insurance law, banking law, inheritance law etc. Unless you plan on rewriting most of the laws which depend on marriage, a state (at any level) not recognizing marriage is not 'workable' or for that matter realistic.
    So how do people manage all of that stuff when they aren't married? I'm pretty sure people do fine without it.
    Last edited by Henrin; 11-07-14 at 02:04 PM.

  4. #214
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,941

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Those are equal protection cases that allowed access to the legal mechanism in place. They do not assert that the existence of the mechanism itself is a constitutional right.

    I don't understand the resistence to this - people talk all the time on this forum about "government getting out of the marriage business" and though many (myself included) have provided reasons for why this is a bad idea, I've never come across claims that it would be illegal or unconstitutional.

    As you allude to in that last sentence, there are a myriad of vehicles that could be used to accomplish this, the concept of "civil marriage" is convenient, but hardly necessary, much less constitutionally required.
    Some people say the government should get out of marriage, not all or even most. Many of us argue that the government protects us by recognizing our legal relationships, protects our rights, such as with the FMLA and inheritance, medical decision making laws, and so many other laws regarding spouses, marriage, and legal kin in general. The government should merely just not be arbitrarily deciding to prevent people from getting married based on certain groups' feelings about those people getting married.

    There is nothing that is currently provided or that could be provided to the same degree of efficiency (that we know of now) like marriage. Until that happens, marriage must be protected as a right.
    "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.

  5. #215
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,651

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    So you keep filing until you find a judge that recognizes your standing if it is really an issue. That is the best you can do. There are certainly some flaws, but that doesn't mean the system should be completely thrown out, particularly when there is no other way being given for how to handle this. Unless you want to just throw out the Constitution altogether and just trust the government to ensure everyone's rights are upheld.

    Also, you seem to continue to be going off on tangents here. None of this has anything to do with the specific case we are discussing, which is same sex marriage and whether those who are challenging the same sex marriage bans are having their rights violated by these specific laws. They have standing, evidenced by the fact that their case has been heard and ruled on multiple times now (for each one, at least twice). The fact that other groups who feel that laws are violating their rights have not been found to have standing (or have, but have not had it ruled on in their favor) doesn't matter in any way to this particular case/issue.
    I fully understand your passion on this (SSM) issue, I do not understand how you are not basing your arguments on a tangent (or implied right) since marriage is not mentioned, at all, in the US constitution. Note that the 15th and 19th amendments were added (due to majority opinion?) to address issues which you now seem to imply were "fully covered" under the 14th amendment.

    Sometimes, we need to make things clear, via constitutional amendment, what is (and is not) covered by the US constitution. It seems to have taken constitutional amendment to ban/restore the recreational use of alcohol yet no such constitutional action was needed to ban marijuana nationwide - why do suppose that was?
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  6. #216
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    There is nothing that is currently provided or that could be provided to the same degree of efficiency (that we know of now) like marriage. Until that happens, marriage must be protected as a right.
    Marriage being a right has nothing to do with government contract towards marriage.

  7. #217
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,941

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    The courts never said people have a right to have their marriages recognized by the state.
    Yes, they did. They struck down laws that did not recognize these marriages, while saying that they had a right to marriage. How else is that to be taken other than there is a right to marriage?
    "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. #218
    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: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    There is nothing "sound" or "brilliant" about his argument at all. Striking down the bans to same sex couples getting married does not "fundamentally change" marriage at all, nor does it change any legal definition of marriage itself, unless you consider the legal definition of marriage to be based in how it is restricted, which means you could not legitimately use such a definition as a legal argument for why that restriction should not be in place since the argument itself relies on the restriction being in place for the definition not to be changed. It is circular reasoning, and not legally legitimate.

    We shall see, but I bet dollars to donuts that the USSC chooses to punt this again, and again until some brilliant lawyer finds a way to show the court, that a federal court has the jurisdiction to tell a state how to define its marriage laws. The USSC ruling on Prop 8 never even got close to that elephant, and Sutton points out just how slippery that would become if they even sniffed it. Like I said, he double dog dared the USSC to take up the issue. There was no circular reasoning nor logic involved. Rather, Sutton simply placed the issue and warring parties on full display and explained why, one, the case did not warrant a 14th and due process challenge, two, that states have the right and responsibility to decide important civil liberties for themselves, and three, that homosexuality as a suspect class only met one criterion, and left the other three untarnished. He also took great pains in righting the general misinterpretations of the often used court precedents used by both sides of the debate. Instructing on what was really being decided in Loving, Windsor, Lawrence etc..


    The fact you found this opinion circular and found Walkers opinion brilliant doesn't surprise me much.

    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

  9. #219
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Yes, they did. They struck down laws that did not recognize these marriages, while saying that they had a right to marriage. How else is that to be taken other than there is a right to marriage?
    Sigh. A right to marriage only implies that people have a right to marry, not that they have a right to government recognition of their marriage.

  10. #220
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,941

    Re: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Marriage being a right has nothing to do with government contract towards marriage.
    It has to do with the government recognizing a relationship existing between two people making those people legal kin, in this case spouses, just as they recognize legal relationships established by birth certificates and adoption records.
    "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 22 of 56 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... 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
  •