Page 13 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 233

Thread: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

  1. #121
    Sage
    Geoist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    9,307

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    You mean the largely democrat South?
    Which was overwhelmingly socially conservative... yes.
    "Men did not make the earth ... it is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property... Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds." -- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice
    http://www.wealthandwant.com/

  2. #122
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-16 @ 01:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,243

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Hasnt this been tried before in other states? And overturned?

    And if SCOTUS decides TX must allow SSM, wouldnt this be useless anyway? As well as SCOTUS if also decides that other states must recognized SSMs from other states?
    Nullification. States can bar federal law if they want to. Usually they cave when the feds pull back funding, which in my view is wrong but that is part of how the federal government has usurped power. There are 6 states that have nullified federal gun laws and 5 who have nullified marijuana laws.

    When the federal government was created, the states had dominion over their own areas and the federal government was given very specific enumerated powers. They have since granted themselves other powers that are not theirs too assume but the illusion is enforced and states lack the balls (for the most part) to oppose them. If the feds decide to withhold money from Texas over this then Texas should nullify federal taxes collected on oil refineries or other such. The STATES, not the federal government, are supposed to hold the most power. We need to get back to that.

  3. #123
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 03:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    26,435

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    No, they weren't. The feds didn't have the grant of power to ban sodomy. However, the state and local does, and such laws existed all throughout the lifetime of the founders. Had they been unconstitutional, don't you think they would have known, having written the constitution?
    Exactly.
    "Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free."

    "No, you'll be *a* judge of that, just like everyone else who reads it."
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  4. #124
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Exactly.
    Didn't read the whole thing did you? The feds don't, but the states do.

  5. #125
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 03:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    26,435

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Didn't read the whole thing did you? The feds don't, but the states do.
    The states cant do anything that is unConstitutional.
    "Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free."

    "No, you'll be *a* judge of that, just like everyone else who reads it."
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  6. #126
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    09-05-17 @ 12:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    21,948

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetron View Post
    The issue with gay marriage is the word marriage. Marriage originated as a religious institution, it was meant to be the joining of a reproductive group into a religiously blessed union (this hopefully will cover poly, and monogamous for everyone). The point being that said religion was giving you the thumbs up to make babies and not feel bad about it. The point of this is that marriage is a concept that stems from a religious institution that was recognized by the state. As such the state lacks the power to create gay marriage because marriage is not created by the state, only recognized. If this is an issue of rights then options exist such as civil unions. While there would be some who would oppose them it would be trivial effort if the homosexual rights groups refocused to equalize the rights available under said unions.

    Gay marriage is a violation of the separation of church and state because it is the state attempting to define a religious institution and force them to comply. Civil unions are on the other hand totally within the rights of the state to create and manage as they see fit. The question then becomes if equality is the goal why is the word marriage so important to homosexual couples. They could easily obtain equality with a civil union.
    Are you saying that religion has a patent on marriage? It has long expired and the State now is the primary instrument of marriage. Religious ceremonies are not even valid without a license from the State. You argument is a total fail. As far as civil union is concerned ALL marriages are civil unions first so we can just change all of them then. You certainly won't mind....it's just a "word".
    Last edited by iguanaman; 05-13-15 at 02:18 PM.

  7. #127
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    50,235

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Actually no, they can't. The Marshalls work for the Executive Branch, not the Judicial. They can request the Executive send the Marshalls. Same goes for the Coast Guard.

    This is why Marbury never took his seat despite the court's ruling.
    Yeah, and in what universe would our current executive fail to follow such an order?
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Well, certainly the customer is not an N-word.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You know her?

  8. #128
    Student
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Last Seen
    02-04-16 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    162

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Are you saying that religion has a patent on marriage? It has long expired and the State now is the primary instrument of marriage. Religious ceremonies are not even valid without a license from the State. You argument is a total fail. As far as civil union is concerned ALL marriages are civil unions first so we can just change all of them then. You certainly won't mind....it's just a "word".
    Religious ceremonies are valid without a license, what one does not acquire without a license is recognition by the state. This is a common misunderstanding. The institution of marriage is a religious one, to gain state benefits from this religious institution one must obtain a marriage license. That is the method by which the state has chosen to recognize the religious institution of marriage. The other issue is the concept that its just a word. Marriage has a meaning, a meaning that has existed for an extremely long time. The very fact that there is such a huge debate over this issue shows how well known and deeply ingrained that meaning is. If marriage was just a "word" then there would never have been a gay "marriage" debate. The issue stems from the fact that Marriage has a meaning, and that homosexual unions do not fit that concept. This is why there is such a huge debate. Homosexual unions can obtain all the rights that heterosexual marriages have under the equal rights amendments what they should not be allowed to do is to alter a fundamental concept to include themselves within its boundaries.

    The very fact that the debate is about gay "marriage" shows it is not an attempt to gain equal rights. If one wanted equal rights they could simply bring a court case demanding that civial unions be granted all rights given to state recognized marriages. Under that platform there is no possible way for the courts to turn it down. It would violate the equal rights amendment. This would then solve all the problems such as tax benefits, inheritance, etc. It is plain to see though that this is not the goal. The goal is to alter the fundamental meaning of marriage so as to legitimize these unions morally. The hope is that if the word marriage can be changed to include homosexual unions they will obtain the moral equivalence they desire. The problem is, as evidenced by the public conflict, it is not considered morally equivalent. To attempt to force a change in peoples morals by use of powers of the state one enters very dangerous territory. It should always be the goal of the populace to keep the state out of the game of moral enforcement. The greatest dictatorships arise from such abuses.

  9. #129
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    The states cant do anything that is unConstitutional.
    Of course, but there is no right to sodomy in the US constitution.

  10. #130
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Tex. bill would bar local officials from issuing same-sex-marriage licenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Yeah, and in what universe would our current executive fail to follow such an order?
    That doesn't make your inaccurate assertion that the SCOTUS commands the US Marshall service, the Coast Guard or the National Guard any more correct.

Page 13 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... 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
  •