Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 92

Thread: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

  1. #41
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,769

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    They are not now, but 100 years ago and forever before that then they were all religious or sanctioned by religion and none were not.

    We have non-religious marriages now because the government has taken away the authority of the religions, and the State has violated the religious institution of marriage.

    Now today it is different because the government has violated marriages.
    That's simply wrong. Marriage has been about property rights and inheritance, it only became about religion because religion insisted on shoving it's nose where it was never invited, at a time where religion and the government were largely one and the same. Nobody ever granted religion control over marriage, they simply insisted that they had it. They were wrong. They are still wrong. And even if 100 years ago they pretended to control marriage, things change. Civil marriage and government control of marriage has existed in America dating back to the early 1800s. This is nothing new. The religious have been screaming discrimination for a long time and it holds no more traction today than it did when the Mormons were screaming about polygamy back in the 1850s.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  2. #42
    Sage
    JumpinJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Last Seen
    05-12-17 @ 10:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,628

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional | Reuters



    The order:
    8:14-cv-00356 #54 - Nebraska Memo and Order



    The order also references one of my favorite judicial smackdowns in the history of this issue, Baskin v Bogan:



    Again and again, proponents of same-sex marriage bans simply cannot make a reasonable case for their personal beliefs to be law.
    I don't have a horse in the race, and I don't care much about it, but this is really a done deal in the U.S. Same sex marriage is here to stay, and it soon will be country-wide.
    ________________________________

  3. #43
    The Expert
    JP Cusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Hollywood, MD. USA, 20636
    Last Seen
    04-22-15 @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    I dont think the govt is immoral just because of how it recognizes marriage...or in general. It may be 'amoral' but I'm thinking "objective' here, not 'empty of morals.' The recognition and protection of rights for individuals is not an *immoral* basis for governing IMO. It does mean however, that it should try to protect those rights as equally (fairly) as possible.
    It is true that the USA government is not immoral simply because of violating the institution of marriage, and yes the gov immorality goes far deeper than just that.

    And I reject the pretense of amoral as there really is no such thing.

    Claiming amoral is just a cowardly way of being immoral - IMO.

    There is no individual right in marriage as every marriage takes two (2), and marriage includes the government now instead of God so that still makes three (3) and not an individual.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    May I ask how the govt allowing atheists to marry has harmed your marriage? Anyone's marriage? Has made marriage 'less religious' for religious people? How as it harmed religion in America? Has it taken God out of your life or marriage somehow?
    Atheist do not get married in any Church, unless they want the blessing of that religion.

    If the Atheist is marrying a religious person in a religious sacrament of marriage then that Atheist is getting the religious blessing.

    The discussion here is NOT about Atheist, even though I concede that the homosexual marriages are really in that same box.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    SIGNATURE: JP Cusick
    Mr. Know-it-all, sir.

  4. #44
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,781

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    It is true that the USA government is not immoral simply because of violating the institution of marriage, and yes the gov immorality goes far deeper than just that.

    And I reject the pretense of amoral as there really is no such thing.

    Claiming amoral is just a cowardly way of being immoral - IMO.

    There is no individual right in marriage as every marriage takes two (2), and marriage includes the government now instead of God so that still makes three (3) and not an individual.


    Atheist do not get married in any Church, unless they want the blessing of that religion.

    If the Atheist is marrying a religious person in a religious sacrament of marriage then that Atheist is getting the religious blessing.

    The discussion here is NOT about Atheist, even though I concede that the homosexual marriages are really in that same box.
    One can look at 'amoral' as 'neutral' IMO. There are laws that are neither moral or immoral. Marriage is also considered an individual right because you cannot force an individual to marry. It's an individual act to marry someone. But yes, marriages are comprised of 2 people.

    But athiests do marry. They also marry in churches because they are pretty places where people get married, lots of people can sit, and the clergy of most religions will even marry them. Why is that? Why will religious clergy marry people that arent religious?

    Anyway, you didnt answer my questions about how non-religious people marrying has changed the institution of marriage for religious people or their marriages. Can you show any changes? Any affects on these married people or their marriages? This goes back to your original reasons for objecting to SSM. You also never explained why no religions tried to stop non-religious people from marrying the way they have attempted to do so with SSM. Can you say?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  5. #45
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,497

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    The problem is that marriage was originally an institution of religion, and instead of the separation of church from State the States took over control of marriage away from religion thereby violating the institution, and after that then the State laws and Federal laws have no basis in morality and thereby the secular laws do not have any authority to say "no" to the same sex marriage.

    It is a violation of the church by the State.

    Of course we never see that position argued in the Courts.

    All the State has is civil unions so calling a civil union as a marriage is just a play on words.

    Of course now the Churches have mostly bowed to the demands and orders of the States and thereby the institution of marriage is violated.

    The irony of it is that marriages for religious people and for natural partners was already being destroyed by the laws so letting the homosexuals have that dead institution of marriage is ironic since they are the only ones left in the USA who sees marriage as desirable or as valuable or as having any meaning.

    A lot (if not most or all) of the States have local representatives who are trying to show their self to be politically against the same sex marriage in order to get that vote so they create those unsound laws which can never stand up in Court so THEN those representatives can pretend to be against it when really it is just a charade.
    No, not really...since ancient times and even today, marriages were not out of religious reason (or tenet) but for both business and social reasons of joining specific families together for sharing status, power in numbers and/or wealth.

    Arranged marriage happens in a lot countries today that might be performed in church - but far from doing it to satisfy a religious tenet.

  6. #46
    The Expert
    JP Cusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Hollywood, MD. USA, 20636
    Last Seen
    04-22-15 @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    One can look at 'amoral' as 'neutral' IMO. There are laws that are neither moral or immoral. Marriage is also considered an individual right because you cannot force an individual to marry. It's an individual act to marry someone. But yes, marriages are comprised of 2 people.

    But athiests do marry. They also marry in churches because they are pretty places where people get married, lots of people can sit, and the clergy of most religions will even marry them. Why is that? Why will religious clergy marry people that arent religious?

    Anyway, you didnt answer my questions about how non-religious people marrying has changed the institution of marriage for religious people or their marriages. Can you show any changes? Any affects on these married people or their marriages? This goes back to your original reasons for objecting to SSM. You also never explained why no religions tried to stop non-religious people from marrying the way they have attempted to do so with SSM. Can you say?
    I do not want you to just think that I am ignoring your comment, which in fact I am doing.

    It is all irrelevant and sidetracking and there is really nothing for me to say to it.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    SIGNATURE: JP Cusick
    Mr. Know-it-all, sir.

  7. #47
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,781

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    I do not want you to just think that I am ignoring your comment, which in fact I am doing.

    It is all irrelevant and sidetracking and there is really nothing for me to say to it.

    OK, then if you cant answer those questions, your earlier position is nullified...it's not valid if there arent actually reasons for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  8. #48
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,759

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    This is the point that government has violated the religious institution of marriage and now marriage is nothing more than an government joke of a marriage.
    Religion never owned it in the first place.

    Now marriage is a temporary contract based only on the government, along with the huge divorce industry.

    My own suggestion is for religious people to only get married within their faith under God, and do NOT get entrapped by the immoral and baseless government marriages.
    So, don't. No religious person has ever been forced to have the government recognize their union. Just don't sign the paperwork. Easy enough.

    They would lose some government benefits - yes, but that would also give them some protection from the government chopping block for their marriage and for their family.

    Just let the homosexuals have the legal marriages since they are now the ones left who see any value to it.
    I really don't see what your problem is. Every single religious person already has the right to do what you suggest.


    ===============================================



    The reason there has never been a fight like this before is because the government is now forcing this onto the religion.
    No they aren't. You don't have to marry a dude.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  9. #49
    The Expert
    JP Cusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Hollywood, MD. USA, 20636
    Last Seen
    04-22-15 @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JumpinJack View Post
    I don't have a horse in the race, and I don't care much about it, but this is really a done deal in the U.S. Same sex marriage is here to stay, and it soon will be country-wide.
    I agree that it is a done deal, and if somehow it ever gets turned back in the future then that would be abrupt and extremely uncomfortable.

    My point was simply to include the reality that this action marks the violation of the Church by the State and I see that as noteworthy.

    There is no reason why we would not properly morn the huge loss of our old compatriots.

    Both religion and marriage have been violated by the State for the purpose of homosexuality.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    SIGNATURE: JP Cusick
    Mr. Know-it-all, sir.

  10. #50
    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: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    I certainly agree and accept that religion (particularly Protestant Christianity) was the ring leader in their own destruction because Christianity made the huge mistake of viewing the government as the hand of God and they viewed the USA as a Christian Nation which it was NOT, and so the government eventually turned against the foolish religion that gave its power over to an immoral entity of government.

    So yes the Christians are at fault for their own ruin, but it is still the government that violates the Institution of marriage.



    ==================================================



    They are not now, but 100 years ago and forever before that then they were all religious or sanctioned by religion and none were not.

    We have non-religious marriages now because the government has taken away the authority of the religions, and the State has violated the religious institution of marriage.

    Now today it is different because the government has violated marriages.
    This is not true. Many marriages had no religious involvement at all, even 100, 200, 500, 1000 years ago and further. Several civilizations didn't include religion at all in marriage. Even in early Christianity, European cultures, religion really wasn't important for determining marriage, hence why there were decrees in about the 10th Century or so from the Church (because they had gained enough power at that time) to involve religion in 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.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •