Page 23 of 56 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 557

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

  1. #221
    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
    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.
    No, the words "right to marriage" only imply that people have a right to marry. It doesn't deal with any legal protections that come about because of government contract.

  2. #222
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,601

    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.
    If one obtains a right only by state recognition of a relationship (or by state license) was that ever a right at all?
    “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

  3. #223
    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: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Sigh, a right to marriage only implies that people have a right to marry, not that they have a right to government recognition of marriage.
    No. If that was it, then the Lovings could have merely lived in the state of Virginia without being prosecuted for claiming they were married and antimiscegenation laws would still be in place, legally enforceable.
    "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. #224
    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: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    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-
    I highly doubt they can legitimately "punt" this issue now, since the decision made by this court and the others are so opposite.

    Sutton uses the same stupid slippery slope fallacy that others try, which is far from brilliant, that striking down restrictions based on sex/gender means that the state couldn't legitimately restrict marriage in any way, which is wrong, and as a Federal Circuit Court judge he should know that.
    "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. #225
    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
    No. If that was it, then the Lovings could have merely lived in the state of Virginia without being prosecuted for claiming they were married and antimiscegenation laws would still be in place, legally enforceable.
    What was the wording they used? "Right to marriage". Can people get married and not be legally married? Yes. The wording they used only talks of the act of getting married.

    To claim that the government is obligated to be involved in marriage because of the words "right to marriage" has no basis.

  6. #226
    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: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    What was the wording they used? "Right to marriage". Can people get married and not be legally married? Yes. The wording they used only talks of the act of getting married.
    They were using them directly in connection to laws that recognized marriage. You cannot get a legal marriage recognition without legally being recognized as married. You are wrong. It is not talking about the "act" of getting married, but the recognition of the state of that relationship, just as the state recognizes other marriages.
    "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
    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
    I highly doubt they can legitimately "punt" this issue now, since the decision made by this court and the others are so opposite.

    Sutton uses the same stupid slippery slope fallacy that others try, which is far from brilliant, that striking down restrictions based on sex/gender means that the state couldn't legitimately restrict marriage in any way, which is wrong, and as a Federal Circuit Court judge he should know that.

    But marriages are restricted from one state to the other, as Sutton points out, certain marriages are allowed in some states even to this day (See second cousins) and disallowed in others. To with, marriages where age of consent differ from state to state are, and are not recognized similarly. Furthermore, until just recently, if you wanted a no fault divorce in NY state, you couldn't get one, but could move to a state that recognized it and have one without an issue. The point is that states do have this right and responsibility to determine eligibility, and although they may differ from state to state, like any other "right", the states reserve to themselves, partiality.

    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

  8. #228
    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: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    But marriages are restricted from one state to the other, as Sutton points out, certain marriages are allowed in some states even to this day (See second cousins) and disallowed in others. To with, marriages where age of consent differ from state to state are, and are not recognized similarly. Furthermore, until just recently, if you wanted a no fault divorce in NY state, you couldn't get one, but could move to a state that recognized it and have one without an issue. The point is that states do have this right and responsibility to determine eligibility, and although they may differ from state to state, like any other "right", the states reserve to themselves, partiality.

    Tim-
    And second cousins is likely to be the next fight we see that actually has a chance of winning due to a question of constitutionality of such restrictions. Age of consent laws may be challenged soon as well. The fact that states have different restrictions does not make all those restrictions automatically constitutional if they are challenged. Some likely wouldn't be, depending on the circumstances.

    But those things mentioned can, in at least some cases, point out what could be legitimate state interests furthered by those restrictions, which is the point. The state interest must be furthered by the restriction. The state interest is not in why the other thing is allowed, as is the attempted claim. Take first cousins (since really, first cousins are the battle ground, not second cousins, to happen next). Some states prevent them from getting married only if they can have children together, which completely invalidates any argument about how marriage was meant to be about those with the potential for having children to ensure they are married. These couples are specifically only allowed to get married if they cannot have children with each other.
    "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.

  9. #229
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Opposite genders compliment each other in unequivocal material ways that benefit society, whereas homosexuals do not, at least not nearly in the same way.


    Tim-

    When examining equal treatment under the law, it is needful to compare similarly situated individuals (or in this case couples - since the "couple" is the basis of difference) and then to supply a legally valid reasoning as to WHY the individuals (or in this case couples) are treated differently.

    So here is your shot, make your legal argument for what this "unequivocal marterial" way that law abiding, tax paying, US Citizen, infertile, non-related, consenting, adults who are in a different-sex relationship and are allowed to Civilly Marry (in all States) and yet law abiding, tax paying, US Citizen, infertile, non-related, consenting, adults who are in a same-sex relationship and are not allowed to Civilly Marry (in some States).


    Remember: "Tradition" is not a legally valid reason for unequal treatment and "Religion" is not a legally valid reason. In addition, in ability to procreate is not a legally valid reason as it is not a standard that different-sex couples must be able to meet and there are actually places where different-sex couples must prove infertility before being allowed to Civilly Marry.



    The floor is yours.



    >>>>

  10. #230
    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
    And second cousins is likely to be the next fight we see that actually has a chance of winning due to a question of constitutionality of such restrictions. Age of consent laws may be challenged soon as well. The fact that states have different restrictions does not make all those restrictions automatically constitutional if they are challenged. Some likely wouldn't be, depending on the circumstances.

    But those things mentioned can, in at least some cases, point out what could be legitimate state interests furthered by those restrictions, which is the point. The state interest must be furthered by the restriction. The state interest is not in why the other thing is allowed, as is the attempted claim. Take first cousins (since really, first cousins are the battle ground, not second cousins, to happen next). Some states prevent them from getting married only if they can have children together, which completely invalidates any argument about how marriage was meant to be about those with the potential for having children to ensure they are married. These couples are specifically only allowed to get married if they cannot have children with each other.
    Um.. no that is not correct, Rogue. But neither here nor there, the point is that even if the 14th and due process applied (Which it does not) only rational basis is needed. Homosexuals do not fall under suspect class criterion and it isn't even close. Moreover, Sutton also points out why this would be a very slippery path for the USSC to follow regarding states rights. He mentions, among many examples, that requiring strict scrutiny on matters involving civil liberties would open a whirl wind of challenges to almost anything you can think of. I suspect that the USSC will once again say that there are no matters in need of federal relief, and kiss it goodbye. Homosexuals that want to marry can move to a state that allows it, or live with the will of the people through their elected representatives. if over time, gay marriage proves to have no impact on the states that allowed it, then other states will realize their mistake and adopt it, and that is what Sutton expressed in his decision. Courts need not desire to be skeptical of all unresolved moral, or otherwise civil questions better left to the states when the laboratories are still weighing the experiment.



    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

Page 23 of 56 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
  •