Page 24 of 56 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 557

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

  1. #231
    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 WorldWatcher View Post
    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.



    >>>>
    Men and women compliment each other by way of their inherent sexual compatibility to advance the species and posterity of the nation. Homosexuals cannot inherently do this; moreover, there is a generally accepted civil norm that would intrinsically find well suited children being raised by both their biological mother and biological father. In addition, there are some viable valid reasons for wanting children to gather experiences from both their mother and their father, as opposed to two mothers and two fathers. The last two are of course speculative, and opinion, and do not apply to all parents but generally I think you'd find that the majority of clear thinking individuals would place these environments above that of any others. Now, are you going to proceed to list every single exception to the rule to bolster your argument, or can we just agree that, typically, and narrowly speaking, children are best served if they have laws that society allows for their upbringing to be the most desirable and advantageous? Not that they can't receive that in some rare circumstances, but we know that single parent households do a disservice to children, as do fatherless ones. Society, as Sutton points out is merely deciding collectively on the children's best interests, which has the effect of societies best interests in the long run.


    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. #232
    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
    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-
    It is very much correct, and was even mentioned in one of the lower court decisions (of a different circuit). There are first cousins in some states, that according to state law, can only marry each other if they cannot have children with each other.

    State Laws Regarding Marriages Between First Cousins

    First cousin marriage is allowed in these states under the following circumstances:

    Arizona- if both are 65 or older, or one is unable to reproduce.

    Illinois- if both are 50 or older, or one is unable to reproduce.

    Indiana- if both are at least 65.

    Maine- if couple obtains a physician's certificate of genetic counseling.

    Utah- if both are 65 or older, or if both are 55 or older and one is unable to reproduce.

    Wisconsin- if the woman is 55 or older, or one is unable to reproduce.
    There is a very important matter in need of their attention, a difference in rulings by circuit courts on the same issue, on a matter of whether laws that are the same laws are constitutional or not. That requires the SCOTUS's attention, no matter if they like it or not.

    There is no rational basis met though. There is no state interest furthered by not allowing same sex couples to marry.
    "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. #233
    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
    Men and women compliment each other by way of their inherent sexual compatibility to advance the species and posterity of the nation. Homosexuals cannot inherently do this; moreover, there is a generally accepted civil norm that would intrinsically find well suited children being raised by both their biological mother and biological father. In addition, there are some viable valid reasons for wanting children to gather experiences from both their mother and their father, as opposed to two mothers and two fathers. The last two are of course speculative, and opinion, and do not apply to all parents but generally I think you'd find that the majority of clear thinking individuals would place these environments above that of any others. Now, are you going to proceed to list every single exception to the rule to bolster your argument, or can we just agree that, typically, and narrowly speaking, children are best served if they have laws that society allows for their upbringing to be the most desirable and advantageous? Not that they can't receive that in some rare circumstances, but we know that single parent households do a disservice to children, as do fatherless ones. Society, as Sutton points out is merely deciding collectively on the children's best interests, which has the effect of societies best interests in the long run.


    Tim-

    Not under marriage laws, which is what is at issue here, they don't.

    Just because it is your personal belief that "men and women compliment each other", doesn't mean squat to marriage laws.

    And even the decision here admitted that children are not in any way disadvantaged by being raised by same sex parents. You have no valid reasons supported facts or legitimate research for your opinion, only your opinion on this.
    "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. #234
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,619

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

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Not under marriage laws, which is what is at issue here, they don't.

    Just because it is your personal belief that "men and women compliment each other", doesn't mean squat to marriage laws.

    And even the decision here admitted that children are not in any way disadvantaged by being raised by same sex parents. You have no valid reasons supported facts or legitimate research for your opinion, only your opinion on this.
    So, what do you see as the compelling reason for the state to have marriage laws? Or, to put it another way, what is the societal benefit of marriage?
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  5. #235
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    11-25-17 @ 10:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    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.



    >>>>
    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Men and women compliment each other by way of their inherent sexual compatibility to advance the species and posterity of the nation. Homosexuals cannot inherently do this; moreover, there is a generally accepted civil norm that would intrinsically find well suited children being raised by both their biological mother and biological father.

    You failed right form the get-go. If procreation is not a requirement that different-sex couples are held to (and in some places in the US different-sex couples must prove they are INFERTILE to be able to marry), then under equal treatment doctrine it isn't a principle that can be applied to same-sex couples.



    Care to try again?


    >>>>

  6. #236
    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: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    I love the fear equal rights generates and all the false claims and fallacies "like marriage isnt a right" that come with that fear.

    facts and court cases prove marriage to be a right if ANYBODY can bring ONE fact to the table proving different please do so now, we would all love to read this fact that says that SCUTOS and all the other court cases are wrong and we should go with you opinion lol

    fact remains marriage is a right, but if anybody disagrees please bring your proof forward now

    field-cricket.jpg
    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

  7. #237
    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: Appeals court upholds laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    This is why the 'government should get out marriage' nonsense needs to stop. That. Is. Not. Going. To Happen. Constitutional or unconstitutional, there isn't a single federal/state government that would even consider doing away with civil marriage. Not only would the political ramifications leave a giant black hole in civil law (as well a child adoption, custody and property laws) it would also mean that the government isn't in the business of recognizing and enforcing social contracts between individuals. Do you people think of this before you try and steer the conversation away from what is actually in question here? Again, your imaginary world where marriage can be done away with, isn't real.
    correct and theres no way to do it without giving less rights and making the whole system more complected and less legally sound
    its asinine to even suggest

    and the most stupid part of it is, what ever replaces it would STILL need government to protect it/ enforce it making the whole reasons moot
    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

  8. #238
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,018

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    So how do people manage all of that stuff when they aren't married? I'm pretty sure people do fine without it.
    Try making a dependency claim from a SO without being married. Try adopting a kid as a legally single person. Again, you're not even looking at this from a legal perspective. Marriage, gay marriage, straight marriage regulate the laws which go into other matters. Doing away with it means rewriting a myriad of other laws and that is what makes doing away with it unrealistic.
    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

  9. #239
    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 jmotivator View Post
    So, what do you see as the compelling reason for the state to have marriage laws? Or, to put it another way, what is the societal benefit of marriage?
    They recognize legal relationships of any kind. Who issues birth certificates? Who do you turn to in the case of a contractual dispute? A family dispute when it comes to who gets what upon a death? A dispute over custody?
    "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.

  10. #240
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

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

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    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.
    You don't need strict scrutiny to overturn bans on gay marriage, they don't even meet the rational basis test. There are no arguments against gay marriage beyond irrational prejudice and religious objection. In the dozens on cases on the issue, nobody has managed to make a halfway credible argument on the matter.

    The slippery slope argument fails because other bans on marriage do meet the rational basis test. The rules for joint income taxes don't work with polyarmory, as it breaks the basic concept of marriage in that all parties are not on the same page . Do 3 people in a polygamous relationship file a single joint tax form with 3 people on it or two tax forms with the income of the middle person split in half? I don't think its immoral or against my religion for a poly group to get married, it simply doesn't work under the law and their relationship needs a new legal framework. That is rational basis and something that anti ssm arguments are fundamentally lacking.

Page 24 of 56 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... 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
  •