Page 18 of 26 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 258

Thread: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

  1. #171
    User MrsMartinBlank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Gross Pointe, MI
    Last Seen
    02-25-17 @ 12:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    35

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    I have no idea how the court would not eliminate the double standard for same sex couples. They clearly have been denied equal rights under the law. Individuals' religious beliefs should not trump fair and equitable treatment under the law. I find it extremely appalling that too many people have not even recieved a basic civics education in our country that we can have a debate about this issue using the constructs of the constitution. Don't waive the flag and talk about your love of our military men and women - when you don't understand the document that they swear to protect.

  2. #172
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,964

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    And as long as everyone is under the same restrictions, the aplication is equal. Even Loving conceded that point.

    If the state banned anyone under 30 from marrying, that's equal. If the state required everyone to take a blood test and reveal the results to their partner before the wedding, that's equal. If the state banned more than one marriage in a lifetime, that's equal. If the state required everyone to complete pre-marital counseling at their own experience, that's equal. If the state banned all marriage completely, that's equal.
    Everyone isn't under the same restrictions though. I cannot marry a woman but you can. You cannot marry a man but I can. And that is only because of our genders. That is different restrictions based on gender/sex.
    "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. #173
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Everyone isn't under the same restrictions though. I cannot marry a woman but you can. You cannot marry a man but I can. And that is only because of our genders. That is different restrictions based on gender/sex.
    Everyone has the ability to marry the opposit sex, and no one can marry the same sex. Equal aplication to the sexes already exists.

  4. #174
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,964

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Everyone has the ability to marry the opposit sex, and no one can marry the same sex. Equal aplication to the sexes already exists.
    That is denial by trying to adapt the wording to make it seem that everyone has the same restrictions on them. You are wrong. I've shown you that everyone does not have the same restrictions on them. This is like saying that if only men can be doctors and women can be lawyers, then they are facing the same restrictions of the law because each is allowed to be in a profession the other can't, making it fair.
    "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. #175
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    That is denial by trying to adapt the wording to make it seem that everyone has the same restrictions on them. You are wrong. I've shown you that everyone does not have the same restrictions on them. This is like saying that if only men can be doctors and women can be lawyers, then they are facing the same restrictions of the law because each is allowed to be in a profession the other can't, making it fair.
    Both sexes have the same restrictions. Both sexes have the same allowances. Equality between the sexes already exists.

    The truth is SSM isn't about the sexes, it's about sexual orientation, and there is not equality between the sexual orientations. Heteros can marry whom they are naturally attracted too but gays cannot. That's inequality, that's where the 14th Amendment comes in. Why can't pro-SSM just be honest about that for a change?

  6. #176
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,964

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Both sexes have the same restrictions. Both sexes have the same allowances. Equality between the sexes already exists.

    The truth is SSM isn't about the sexes, it's about sexual orientation, and there is not equality between the sexual orientations. Heteros can marry whom they are naturally attracted too but gays cannot. That's inequality, that's where the 14th Amendment comes in. Why can't pro-SSM just be honest about that for a change?
    Because that is only part of it. Anyone can legally marry someone they are not attracted to for various reasons, so long as they are of the opposite sex. Attraction is not a requirement of marriage. It is just as valid to show that the bans discriminate based on sex as it is to say they discriminate against mainly those who are not heterosexual.
    "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. #177
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Because that is only part of it.
    If you have to lie about any part of your cause, then your whole cause is bull****.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Anyone can legally marry someone they are not attracted to for various reasons, so long as they are of the opposite sex.
    You should know that's not true. That's a bad claim, and you should feel bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Attraction is not a requirement of marriage.
    No one said it was.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    It is just as valid to show that the bans discriminate based on sex as it is to say they discriminate against mainly those who are not heterosexual.
    It's not valid at all. The sexes already enjoy equality. It's the orientations which don't.

  8. #178
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,964

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    If you have to lie about any part of your cause, then your whole cause is bull****.


    You should know that's not true. That's a bad claim, and you should feel bad.


    No one said it was.


    It's not valid at all. The sexes already enjoy equality. It's the orientations which don't.
    You are either ignorant or in denial if you believe people don't legally marry for reasons other than attraction. Never has anyone ever been punished in the US for getting married just to have a father or mother for their child. Never has anyone ever been legally punished for agreeing to enter into an arranged marriage due to their sense of tradition and/or cultural beliefs. Neither require attraction to happen. Plus there is no way to accurately measure attractiveness. Knowing information about a person does not prove you are attracted to them.

    I'm not lying at all. The sexes are treated differently under same sex marriage bans. Unequal treatment by the law.
    "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. #179
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 04:17 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,032

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony60 View Post
    It has not been decided that not changing the definition of marriage violates the equal protection clause.
    No, the SCOTUS hasn't decided this yet. But other courts have.

  10. #180
    Professor
    wolfsgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,140

    Re: Supreme Court to take up same sex marriage issues in April

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Both sexes have the same restrictions. Both sexes have the same allowances. Equality between the sexes already exists.

    The truth is SSM isn't about the sexes, it's about sexual orientation, and there is not equality between the sexual orientations. Heteros can marry whom they are naturally attracted too but gays cannot. That's inequality, that's where the 14th Amendment comes in. Why can't pro-SSM just be honest about that for a change?
    That argument was tried in the Loving case. The law was equal since all races were treated the same, no one could marry someone of the other race.

    The fifth, and final, argument judges would use to justify miscegenation law was undoubtedly the most important; it used these claims that interracial marriage was unnatural and immoral to find a way around the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection under the laws." How did judges do this? They insisted that because miscegenation laws punished both the black and white partners to an interracial marriage, they affected blacks and whites "equally." This argument, which is usually called the equal application claim, was hammered out in state supreme courts in the late 1870s, endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in 1882, and would be repeated by judges for the next 85 years.
    History News Network | Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation
    " May you live as long as you wish, and love as long as you live"
    R.A. Heinlein

Page 18 of 26 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... 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
  •