Page 29 of 46 FirstFirst ... 19272829303139 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 456

Thread: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

  1. #281
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by LaylaWindu View Post
    You realize you just did it again right? You just totally made something up. Ill make note that just the type of poster you are.
    And what did I make up?

    Edit: Also, you haven't actually argued with me on any points that I've seen. Could be wrong but, the only post I've noted was that slide in to jump onto another argument. Kind of makes you the little guy that is dancing around another's feet echoing them doesn't it?

    If you have something of note to say, then say it.

  2. #282
    One with the Force
    LaylaWindu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    PA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,964

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    And what did I make up?

    Edit: Also, you haven't actually argued with me on any points that I've seen. Could be wrong but, the only post I've noted was that slide in to jump onto another argument. Kind of makes you the little guy that is dancing around another's feet echoing them doesn't it?

    If you have something of note to say, then say it.
    You made up that I take this personally and seriously, that's completely made up.

    Again you can't be serious. My original points to you are still out there, you dodged them each time because you have nothing to back up your claims, the only one doing the dancing is you as many other posters pointed out. So there's the note, step up and defend that you said and address the points posters make or continue to have that pointed out by many hahaha you're funny.
    Last edited by LaylaWindu; 02-16-15 at 08:00 AM.
    "We are never done with lessons, not while we live"

  3. #283
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,243

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    When the argument is " the Feds have no business in marriage because it is not explicitly stated in the Constitution" then Loving becomes a very pertinent precedent.

    Do you wish to alter your argument?
    It doesn't look like I'm getting through to you.
    I'm agreeing that it will be used to argue the unconstitutionality of SSM bans.
    I can't be any clearer.
    Sheesh.
    IF SOMETHING EXPLAINS EVERYTHING, IT EXPLAINS NOTHING.

  4. #284
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,243

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    He hasn't made an appointee since 2010. Obama back then never declared support for SSM and the dems as a whole ran scared ****less from the subject. The decision will likely be 6-3. Most likely he never even asked any of his appointees about it and the series of federal court rulings all came in the past couple years, the vast majority appointed by other presidents who all did whatever they could to oppose SSM

    Bush II tried to pass an amendment against SSM for christ sakes, but john roberts has changed his stance on it to the point it wouldn't surprise me if he voted with the majority in june. The justices aren't beholden to whatever promises they make and their opinions and interpretations change. They're appointed for life
    This whole notion about Presidents not having a good sense how their Judicial appointments would decide is almost too bizarre to entertain.
    When your argument starts with and stays on the granular level (e.g. SSM) then there's never any common ground in sight.
    Obama and every President looks at how their potential nominees have decided cases and then decides if they can get them through the process since the political opposition is doing the same thing.
    That's all I'm saying and it's so obvious I get the feeling we're talking past each other.

    In the case of Obama, his appointees have not disappointed him so far and likely won't with SSM.
    And if you want to stay granular as with SSM itself, Obama has favored it before he was elected the 1st time and it's reasonable to assume he'd make appointments that he believed would decide that way.

    You disagree with any of that?
    IF SOMETHING EXPLAINS EVERYTHING, IT EXPLAINS NOTHING.

  5. #285
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,243

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    Actually, I just like to lay in a little humor to lighten the mood. Unlike you, I don't take these debates personally or even that seriously.
    As far as me having something to say...



    ...
    Oh man, you nailed it. That one arrived with a lot of baggage.

    The rest of your comment was on the mark also ... just too long to reproduce since you addressed more than 1 poster.
    IF SOMETHING EXPLAINS EVERYTHING, IT EXPLAINS NOTHING.

  6. #286
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,243

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    And what did I make up?

    Edit: Also, you haven't actually argued with me on any points that I've seen. Could be wrong but, the only post I've noted was that slide in to jump onto another argument. Kind of makes you the little guy that is dancing around another's feet echoing them doesn't it?

    If you have something of note to say, then say it.
    I learned a painful lesson yesterday.
    Some people are just given to strange behavior when they find themselves behind a keyboard.
    Unfortunate but true.
    IF SOMETHING EXPLAINS EVERYTHING, IT EXPLAINS NOTHING.

  7. #287
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    It doesn't look like I'm getting through to you.
    I'm agreeing that it will be used to argue the unconstitutionality of SSM bans.
    I can't be any clearer.
    Sheesh.
    Then what is your argument?

  8. #288
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    Actually, I just like to lay in a little humor to lighten the mood. Unlike you, I don't take these debates personally or even that seriously. As far as me having something to say...



    As I stated, believe what you want because I can be sure that one such as yourself hasn't actually sat down and tried to understand other sides arguments, to build the bridges necessary to spread tolerance. I'm guessing all you do is get on here just to vent, not caring who you lash out with in the process. It's all just raw anger at the injustices you perceive, and on a base level I can empathize with it; What appears to be the sheer irrationality of their viewpoint it makes no sense to you. So let me help you here, from one person whose been on both sides of the fence. What you don't get is the fact that most of the people that oppose SSM are conservative. And more than anything, conservatives value individual choice. Now keep in mind that those same conservatives are also the ones that believe that being gay is just a choice (they're wrong of course, but that's an issue for another day).

    That's why I can be so sure that the vast majority of those who oppose SSM wouldn't lock someone up for being gay today, because all they'd be doing is locking them up for a choice. It's antithetical to the conservative way, after all. We saw this when there was such an uproar over those two gay gentlemen kissed during the NFL draft. The backlash had nothing to do with either of them being gay, but everything to do with it being on TV. As many would go to say, "I'm fine with them being gay as long as it's not shoved in my face." Now think back if you will to all the hubbub surrounding Michael Sam; at any point in time did you hear a single peep of people asking he be sent to jail? Of course not, and that is my point.



    You know what a bigot is? See most of the time the word is used whenever the issue of race or homosexuality is brought up, but the definition of bigot isn't at all so narrow. Here's just a couple of examples:





    The funniest thing about this whole issue is that you have become what you hate most: a bigot. Someone who is completely intolerable to view other than your own that you'll go nuclear at the first sign of someone offering a contrarian viewpoint. I suppose it isn't surprising though, as you use the word so much. Perhaps it's because you are so familiar with it?

    Regardless, I don't disagree with you that Cruz is foremost spokesman for the opposition to SSM. But the #1 enemy of the movement? Not at all. You know how I know that's true? Even if someone in all their righteous anger was to strike down the devil himself, the movement would go on. Only now, you've empowered those that you oppose because you've just made him a martyr and showed to the world how intolerant those who argue for SSM can be. The real #1 enemy of the movement, is people like you that get on here and become so hostile with anyone that disagrees. Because that prevents people like myself, from connecting with those on the other side and showing them that there are alternatives to a complete dismantling of everything they know and hold dear.

    Compromise isn't what is important with this issue, Understanding is. Once both sides understand what's important to each other, then it's all about making sure that the priorities of each side are met. At that point, no compromise is necessary.
    Well said. And I have seen a lot of people change their mind on the issue. In fact, most who change their mind do so because they actually meet and get to know gay folk and see their relationships firsthand. That is the difference. It takes time and patience.

  9. #289
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,268
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    This whole notion about Presidents not having a good sense how their Judicial appointments would decide is almost too bizarre to entertain.
    When your argument starts with and stays on the granular level (e.g. SSM) then there's never any common ground in sight.
    Obama and every President looks at how their potential nominees have decided cases and then decides if they can get them through the process since the political opposition is doing the same thing.
    That's all I'm saying and it's so obvious I get the feeling we're talking past each other.

    In the case of Obama, his appointees have not disappointed him so far and likely won't with SSM.
    And if you want to stay granular as with SSM itself, Obama has favored it before he was elected the 1st time and it's reasonable to assume he'd make appointments that he believed would decide that way.

    You disagree with any of that?
    You really think that out of all the issues, Obama used SSM as a litmus test issue for justice appointments?
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  10. #290
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,243

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Then what is your argument?
    Argument about what?
    What do you think I was arguing?
    IF SOMETHING EXPLAINS EVERYTHING, IT EXPLAINS NOTHING.

Page 29 of 46 FirstFirst ... 19272829303139 ... 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
  •