• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alabama Supreme Court Orders Judges to Stop Gay Marriages

Taylor said:
I wonder if they'd grant a stay this time around?


Actually, I believe this can happen fairly quickly - at least in the district over which Judge Granade presides (there are three in the state). They basically request to be "added" to the already decided case. Judge Davis was added as a defendant after it quickly became apparent that the original decision didn't actually do anything. This is something that takes days, not weeks or months. Still a mess, however, since every single judge has to be sued in this manner. Because Judge Granade has no jurisdiction in the other two districts, I believe a separate suit and decision/injunction would be required to get the ball rolling, so probably a longer slog in much of the state.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification.
 
1750Texan said:
State laws are always inferior to federal court rulings. Even Obama knows this. Even Obama stayed his immigration EO implementation when issued by a federal judge.
Click to expand...
Quite wrong, and the situation in Alabama right now makes this clear. The Alabama Supreme Court is absolutely under no legal obligation to defer constitutional analysis to a district court judge.

I also have no idea why you think that Obama's executive orders are state laws.

Alabama has already be denied stays in the Circuit courts and the SC. Arguing that a state probate judge has hierarchy over federal judges is asinine.
Click to expand...
I don't know who you think is making this argument, but it sure isn't me.
 
Lursa said:
Desperate for what? I really dont understand.
Click to expand...

desperate in their attempts to try ANYTHING to defeat equal rights and not let equal rights win

but all thier desperation and last minute hailmarys will fail
in fact many of them will actually backfire and help :D
 
AGENT J said:
many bigots are desperate now just like then
Click to expand...

You can be opposed to SSM without being a bigot. When your best argument is that the other guys are bigots, you are doing more harm than good to your own cause.
 
Redress said:
1.)You can be opposed to SSM without being a bigot.
2.)When your best argument is that the other guys are bigots, you are doing more harm than good to your own cause.
Click to expand...

1.) yes that is 100% true by definition, good thing i have never said different and in fact I have made that same statement many times on this board
2.) i disagree when the its used accurately :shrug: I will continue to use the word based on its definition

but you are free to your opinions
 
FFS it's time to let all consenting adults in this country marry whomever they please. Gay, polygamist, whatever. As long as all parties are of legal age of consent, who the **** cares about who marries who?
 
prometeus said:
How so?
Click to expand...

thats easy, simply feelings without action

Bigot
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

I have no problem with anybody that THINKS/FEELS equal rights for gays is wrong etc. But if they are actively trying to stop it then by definition they are bigots. If they actively treat gays as lesser they are a bigot.
 
Redress said:
Most simply, you can believe that your religion is against it.
Click to expand...

I personally disagree with the people who think gay marriage is wrong. But I 100% agree with your line of thinking in this post and the other. Resorting to name calling isn't going to work (for either side). If someone's religious beliefs tell him that marriage is only between a man and a woman, that's doesn't make that person a bigot.
 
tres borrachos said:
I personally disagree with the people who think gay marriage is wrong. But I 100% agree with your line of thinking in this post and the other. Resorting to name calling isn't going to work (for either side). If someone's religious beliefs tell him that marriage is only between a man and a woman, that's doesn't make that person a bigot.
Click to expand...

The sad part is that the people who will be harmed the most by people who think name calling is good debate are the very people they profess to be trying to support. Most likely by summer SSM will be legal in this country. And then gay couples will have to live with all their neighbors who have been called bigots and worse and are a trifle bitter over it. There are effective arguments for SSM that have nothing to do with those opposed, and are actually effective. But those take actual knowledge to make. It is easier just to call every one who disagrees a bigot.
 
polgara said:
:agree: .. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

can't give that the traditional thanks, but that position needs underscoring.

The bigotry on both sides is astounding, sweeping assumptions made about entire groups, nay nations of people....

Man is free, by the will of God. Man is free, allegedly, by the doctrine of the United States constitution, which also states that 'congress shall make no law...." and the rest about religion.

My denomination is fence sitting. I have supported gay marriage since the mid 90's and cheered when it was legalized here around 2000. Some in my church oppose gay marriage and support a legal challenge that says a local Christian college can have students sign a document saying they will refrain from sex outside of marriage, with specific reference to same sax union. I and a number of others do not. We get along fine and never argue.

So I read this thread, and have to ask who is the bigot? Those who accept an opposing view for what it is and go on? Or those who have to lash out at every decision and ruling that does not go their way, attack and insult individuals because they have a different opinion?
 
Redress said:
Most simply, you can believe that your religion is against it.
Click to expand...

AGENT J said:
thats easy, simply feelings without action

Bigot
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

I have no problem with anybody that THINKS/FEELS equal rights for gays is wrong etc. But if they are actively trying to stop it then by definition they are bigots. If they actively treat gays as lesser they are a bigot.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the replies.
Personally I hold that a bigot is one who acts in some way on prejudices. As people we all have likes and dislikes and as intelligent people we overcome them when it comes to actions that are discriminatory. I for instance do not associate with some groups of people because I do not wish to get into an antagonizing situations with people with whom I may share other common ground. There are of course always exceptions.
 
Redress said:
The sad part is that the people who will be harmed the most by people who think name calling is good debate are the very people they profess to be trying to support. Most likely by summer SSM will be legal in this country. And then gay couples will have to live with all their neighbors who have been called bigots and worse and are a trifle bitter over it. There are effective arguments for SSM that have nothing to do with those opposed, and are actually effective. But those take actual knowledge to make. It is easier just to call every one who disagrees a bigot.
Click to expand...

Calling people who oppose SSM "bigots" in my opinion is no better than when people who oppose SSM call the couple "perverts" or any other name. Name calling, it's always name calling.
 
prometeus said:
Thanks for the replies.
Personally I hold that a bigot is one who acts in some way on prejudices. As people we all have likes and dislikes and as intelligent people we overcome them when it comes to actions that are discriminatory. I for instance do not associate with some groups of people because I do not wish to get into an antagonizing situations with people with whom I may share other common ground. There are of course always exceptions.
Click to expand...

no problem and it seems me and you agree with the definition, it really takes "action" like you said

bigots are those that are actively trying to fight against equal rights and as an american its hypocritical and vile.
 
AGENT J said:
no problem and it seems me and you agree with the definition, it really takes "action" like you said

bigots are those that are actively trying to fight against equal rights and as an american its hypocritical and vile.
Click to expand...
Also to be noted in light of the post by TB about name calling, that in my experience, by far those who would not act on their personal prejudices, will not advocate or argue, debate against equal rights and as such the label of bigot does apply to those who so vehemently speak against equal rights.
 
prometeus said:
Also to be noted in light of the post by TB about name calling, that in my experience, by far those who would not act on their personal prejudices, will not advocate or argue, debate against equal rights and as such the label of bigot does apply to those who so vehemently speak against equal rights.
Click to expand...

correct.
THeres nothing wrong with calling a bigot a bigot IF its accurate. just like theres nothing wrong with calling a murderer a murderer, a christian a Christian or an independent an independent.

its a very simple solution, if one has hurt feelings by ACCURATELY being called a bigot stop being one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom