Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 92

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

  1. #71
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    From the order:



    Zyphlin in part has persuaded me, and this could be what dooms SSM bans. If you take it as gender discrimination, that is that men can do something woman cannot, and woman can do something men cannot, then Intermediate Scrutiny is required and SSM bans fail. The various states have argued that SSM bans pass rational basis review and that is what would be applicable, because SSM bans would not pass higher levels of scrutiny. Going this route lets SCOTUS dodge issues such as whether orientation would be a basis for quasi-suspect class designation, or whether Strict Scrutiny should apply to questions of marriage as a fundamental right.
    It doesn't need to dodge anything at this point, nor would it be appropriate. SSM bans are intended as an orientation discrimination above all, not gender based, nor are heterosexuals of the same sex anywhere near as likely to even want to marry.

    I see no more basis for SCOTUS to rule this way than it did to rule in Loving that interracial marriage bans denied equal protection to white couples

  2. #72
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

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

    Quote Originally Posted by NonConformer View Post
    The national battle over gay marriage rages on. Hardly a day goes by without yet another legal skirmish somewhere; the most recent one is in Nebraska, I think.

    Allow me to break apart this thing we call "marriage". There are really at least two separate aspects:

    First there is the love, sex, and romance aspect. To be blunt, the government has no business here. Nothing in the history books, nor the Declaration of Independence, nor the Constitution, nor the Bible remotely suggest that love, sex, and romance should have governmental oversight.

    The second aspect is the legal contract. This contract, signed by both parties, covers matters such as inheritance, survivor benefits, medical decisions, and such. Now it can be argued that government does have role in the enforcement of legal contracts. And I have no problem at all if two, or more, people of ANY relationship choose to enter unto a binding legal contract covering matters like inheritance and such.

    The problem arises when said legal contract includes the word "marriage", because by word association, we're now getting into matters of love, sex, and romance, which are clearly out of governmental jurisdiction.

    Therefore the solution to this whole same-sex marriage dilemma is obvious: just re-name the darned contract. Call it something that does not include the word "marriage." The name "civil union" has been proposed; sounds Ok by me. And anybody who wants one can have one!

    Meanwhile, keep "marriage" about love, sex, and romance, and if two (or more) people want to participate in it, well that's between them, and their God, assuming they believe in God and so choose to involve him too. But keep government out of it.
    Nah, YOU go call YOUR relationship a "civil union." We'll take "marriage"

    Separate but equal is never equal. "Civil unions" were a complete farce

  3. #73
    One with the Force
    LaylaWindu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    PA
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 02:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,964

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    You realize that multiple states (and D.C.) have passed SSCM through legislative action and that multiple states voted in support of SSCM at the ballot box during General Elections correct?

    The Presbyterian Church is currently voting on whether to authorize SS religious marriages, currently the vote of the organizations is 77 in support and only 37 against. 86 approvals is required for passage.



    >>>>
    I'm not sure why you quoted me but yes I'm fully aware of that.
    "We are never done with lessons, not while we live"

  4. #74
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by LaylaWindu View Post
    I'm not sure why you quoted me but yes I'm fully aware of that.

    I was posting to comments made by JP Cusick, his comments were in response to a post you made as well as another poster.

    I quoted both to show context.


    >>>>

  5. #75
    One with the Force
    LaylaWindu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    PA
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 02:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,964

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    I was posting to comments made by JP Cusick, his comments were in response to a post you made as well as another poster.

    I quoted both to show context.


    >>>>
    oh, ok.
    "We are never done with lessons, not while we live"

  6. #76
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    By the means of respect.

    The means of virtue.

    By the means of voluntary consent.

    Those kinds of means.

    They matter far more then most people realize, and at some level they matter to everyone.
    I know! Like how schools and public accommodations were desegregated! Like how interracial marriage bans were thrown out! Those pesky federal judges overthrowing the will of the people with their damned US Constitution! The nerve of not allowing states to enforce laws on moral disapproval and tradition alone! We should be free to pass laws to discriminate against any group we want! Equal Protection Clause be damned!

  7. #77
    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 roguenuke View Post
    Same sex couples have been getting married in some churches and in general, just not legally recognized, for decades, if not longer. It has always been just as voluntary as opposite couples getting married.
    If not longer then decades -


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


    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    None of those matter to the law.
    You asked a direct question and I gave you a direct answer.

    And yes those do not matter to the law - that was the point.

    And clearly they do not matter to you either.

    But those matter to me far more than any law.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    At the end of the day, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference what religions decide. Marriage is a secular institution.
    Marriage is a secular institution NOW, but it was in the past just a religious institution which has now been violated by the State.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    There are a lot of people who think religion is more important than everything else, a person's religious beliefs gives them the right to violate the law and deserves complete freedom to do whatever they want to in the pursuit of their religious beliefs. These people are crazy.
    That is not being crazy - as that is being liberated and free.

    People that hide behind the laws are usurpers.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    SIGNATURE: JP Cusick
    Mr. Know-it-all, sir.

  8. #78
    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
    If not longer then decades -


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



    You asked a direct question and I gave you a direct answer.

    And yes those do not matter to the law - that was the point.

    And clearly they do not matter to you either.

    But those matter to me far more than any law.


    Marriage is a secular institution NOW, but it was in the past just a religious institution which has now been violated by the State.


    That is not being crazy - as that is being liberated and free.

    People that hide behind the laws are usurpers.
    No idea what your reply to me means. As to the rest, you are wrong. Marriage has involved religion of varying cultures on a varying level. But not all cultures involved religion in marriage and even Christianity was not involved in most marriages until the 10th or 11th century. Many people of many cultures of the past, including cultures where Christianity dominated or was popular, married without religion. It was for social and power and financial reasons.
    "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. #79
    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 roguenuke View Post
    No idea what your reply to me means. As to the rest, you are wrong. Marriage has involved religion of varying cultures on a varying level. But not all cultures involved religion in marriage and even Christianity was not involved in most marriages until the 10th or 11th century. Many people of many cultures of the past, including cultures where Christianity dominated or was popular, married without religion. It was for social and power and financial reasons.
    That is complete nonsense.

    Marriage without religion = mid to late 20th century.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    SIGNATURE: JP Cusick
    Mr. Know-it-all, sir.

  10. #80
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,785

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    That is complete nonsense.

    Marriage without religion = mid to late 20th century.
    Sorry, you're wrong. It was very often about property.
    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.

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 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
  •