Page 9 of 24 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 233

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

  1. #81
    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 JANFU View Post
    I support abortion- I do not support the DP -
    But one could argue it is the State taking lives in each instance.
    Yeah, except it's not. One is a matter of law and due process the other is an individual elective decision. The state is not the one taking the life in the case of abortion.

  2. #82
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    12-05-16 @ 06:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,923

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

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Indeed it does, it's known as the Copyright Clause. Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution.
    Except it does not place a limit on it except for "limited time", which the SCOTUS is right, could mean pretty much any amount of time, since that is relative. I'm not seeing your problem here.
    "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.

  3. #83
    Living in Gods country


    JANFU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    13,678

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

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Yeah, except it's not. One is a matter of law and due process the other is an individual elective decision. The state is not the one taking the life in the case of abortion.
    Except many States place roadblocks in the way of that elective choice.
    And if you take the time to read up on the DP processes you may be surprised at the monstrosity it really is.
    Quote Originally Posted by RickJames3000 View Post
    You need to revisit the chain of association... you only insisted you were a Trump-supporter after you figured out that made you a pederast as well. If I were you. I'd be more discreet about it... but I guess it's your dime.

  4. #84
    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 roguenuke View Post
    Except it does not place a limit on it except for "limited time", which the SCOTUS is right, could mean pretty much any amount of time, since that is relative. I'm not seeing your problem here.
    Leaving aside a little thing called the Federalist Papers and a couple early presidents named Madison and Jefferson. Jefferson was an actuary and in the Federalist it was determined that limited time would be 14 years.

    Although perpetual copyrights and patents are prohibited—the language specifies "limited times"—the Supreme Court has ruled in Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003) that repeated extensions to the term of copyright do not constitute a perpetual copyright
    Copyright Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Which in fact they do and were the very reason for the clause to be included in the constitution.

    OR you can check out how the court ruled on the New Deal. They found much of it to be unconstitutional. Then after FDR threatened to pack the court and the public was up in arms, they reversed themselves post haste. So, were they just joking the first time?
    Last edited by clownboy; 05-12-15 at 06:40 PM.

  5. #85
    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 JANFU View Post
    Except many States place roadblocks in the way of that elective choice.
    And if you take the time to read up on the DP processes you may be surprised at the monstrosity it really is.
    Doesn't matter in this context. They are not equivalent morally or legally.

  6. #86
    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
    Yeah, except it's not. One is a matter of law and due process the other is an individual elective decision. The state is not the one taking the life in the case of abortion.
    What life? The state is not aware of any lives beyond those of born people. Constitutionally, it has no right to be and legally cannot get that information against the will of born people.
    "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.

  7. #87
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Over the edge...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,954

    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.
    Really? When did any particular group or entity monopolize the word?

    Marriage originated as a religious institution
    You need to read a bit more history.

    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.
    That is just ignorant religious babble.

    The point of this is that marriage is a concept that stems from a religious institution that was recognized by the state.
    BS. It is an institution recognized by the state and the state has no basis upon which to redefine it or restrict it and yes that includes polygamy too.

    As such the state lacks the power to create gay marriage because marriage is not created by the state, only recognized.
    More BS. Marriage is created by the persons getting married and again the state has no basis by which to recognize somme but not others.

    If this is an issue of rights then options exist such as civil unions.
    No, the option is anything and everything anyone else can do.

    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.
    You have no clue what you are talking about. Marriage is NOT a religious institution. Are you denying that atheist are getting married?

    The question then becomes if equality is the goal why is the word marriage so important to homosexual couples.
    Why is it so important to ignorant bigots?
    My views are my views, then there is the Christian view:
    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    Of course the third world dregs are breeding like rabbits.

  8. #88
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    12-05-16 @ 06:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,923

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

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Leaving aside a little thing called the Federalist Papers and a couple early presidents named Madison and Jefferson. Jefferson was an actuary and in the Federalist it was determined that limited time would be 14 years.

    Copyright Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Which in fact they do and were the very reason for the clause to be included in the constitution.

    OR you can check out how the court ruled on the New Deal. They found much of it to be unconstitutional. Then after FDR threatened to pack the court and the public was up in arms, they reversed themselves post haste. So, were they just joking the first time?
    The federalist papers are not law. And while I agree that it should not last that long, the Constitution itself does not provide a limit for how long "limited time" actually is officially. Doesn't matter what those in the past felt it should be. They should have put that limit in the actual Constitution.
    "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. #89
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Over the edge...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,954

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

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    The constitution doesn't mention marriage and the SCOTUS has some major shoehorning to do to rule for homosexual marriage as a right.
    Only to the extent that any marriage is a right.
    The real issue here is on what premise if any can a state deny the marriage of some individuals? The real answer is that there is no such premise.
    My views are my views, then there is the Christian view:
    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    Of course the third world dregs are breeding like rabbits.

  10. #90
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Over the edge...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,954

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    let's hope that the SCOTUS ruling is decisive and not some wishy washy loophole filled compromise. this is a clear cut equal protection issue, and the decision should be unassailable.
    You know, on second thought I am no longer sure it should be. I mean the incessant bitching an moaning by so called conservatives over the decades to come may be too much to bear, compared to violating the rights of a small segment of society...
    My views are my views, then there is the Christian view:
    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    Of course the third world dregs are breeding like rabbits.

Page 9 of 24 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... 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
  •