Page 117 of 193 FirstFirst ... 1767107115116117118119127167 ... LastLast
Results 1,161 to 1,170 of 1930

Thread: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

  1. #1161
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,861

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Because this is recognition of marriage from the law. There is no fundamental, legal changes in how marriage operates when you simply open it up to same sex couples the same as opposite sex couples have it. There are fundamental, legal changes in how marriage operates, for the people involved especially, but also in how the government, society deals with spouses, when there are more than two people legally married together or a person has more than one spouse. That is something that needs to be addressed prior to taking away the limitation of how many spouses a person can have at the same time.
    If one is accept polling data, it would appear the majority of people don't have a problem with same sex couples being treated the same way as heterosexual couples. It seems to me, the greater concern people have is how these issues that affect so few people are being used as a carrier for a much greater societal agenda.

    Lets face the facts, same sex marriage will only be an issue for a few percent of the population. However, the cause behind the effort has much more to do with a demand for massive social/cultural change than it does for allowing a couple percent of the population the option of getting married.

    I think it is this fact that has caused so many to push back against something they likely already support in principle.
    President Donald J Trump, 45th President of the United States of America. A victory born in the hearts and minds of Everyday Americans

  2. #1162
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    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: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    If one is accept polling data, it would appear the majority of people don't have a problem with same sex couples being treated the same way as heterosexual couples. It seems to me, the greater concern people have is how these issues that affect so few people are being used as a carrier for a much greater societal agenda.

    Lets face the facts, same sex marriage will only be an issue for a few percent of the population. However, the cause behind the effort has much more to do with a demand for massive social/cultural change than it does for allowing a couple percent of the population the option of getting married.

    I think it is this fact that has caused so many to push back against something they likely already support in principle.
    There aren't that many "pushing back" against same sex marriage though, not in reality. It is the "squeaky wheel" that we are seeing. There is still a very loud, vocal group against same sex marriage fundamentally, not because of what you are claiming. There are very few against same sex marriage for what you are claiming, and they were fence sitters, not actual supporters, most looking for an excuse better than "their icky" or "my religion says so" to justify being against it.

    Societal changes are here. That is part of life, whether people like it or not. They need to understand this. They don't get to stop society from changing just because they don't like the changes that are happening. Doesn't matter how much of the population is leading the charge or the ones seeing the most change.
    "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. #1163
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,200

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Because this is recognition of marriage from the law. There is no fundamental, legal changes in how marriage operates when you simply open it up to same sex couples the same as opposite sex couples have it. There are fundamental, legal changes in how marriage operates, for the people involved especially, but also in how the government, society deals with spouses, when there are more than two people legally married together or a person has more than one spouse. That is something that needs to be addressed prior to taking away the limitation of how many spouses a person can have at the same time.
    I have no idea what you're talking about, but it has zero to do with the point I've been making all along. There's nothing magical about a government piece of paper - the only difference it provides is that the government then looks at individuals differently when bestowing privileges and benefits. If the government piece of paper didn't exist, individuals through contract laws would determine the extent and scope of their personal relationships and how such a relationship would progress or terminate. All the government piece of paper does is make work for lawyers when dealing with those who want to terminate marriage or for the majority of people who aren't holders of the government sanction.

    Just as the government doesn't issue a standard will that is the only will acknowledged by courts and the government doesn't issue a standard living will that is the only living will acknowledged by hospitals and courts, and just as the government doesn't issue the only business contracts that are acknowledged by courts, there is zero need for a government contract for marriage.

    You deem it necessary because the government has intruded into the process and you can't fathom a world where the government doesn't own your personal relationships. I, however, believe differently and I'm not interested in being beholden to government to manage my personal life and I shouldn't be penalized for that position.
    A Canadian conservative is one who believes in limited government and that the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms.

  4. #1164
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,861

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    There aren't that many "pushing back" against same sex marriage though, not in reality. It is the "squeaky wheel" that we are seeing. There is still a very loud, vocal group against same sex marriage fundamentally, not because of what you are claiming. There are very few against same sex marriage for what you are claiming, and they were fence sitters, not actual supporters, most looking for an excuse better than "their icky" or "my religion says so" to justify being against it.

    Societal changes are here. That is part of life, whether people like it or not. They need to understand this. They don't get to stop society from changing just because they don't like the changes that are happening. Doesn't matter how much of the population is leading the charge or the ones seeing the most change.
    Well, yes, there are those who oppose same sex marriage for fundamental reasons based on their freedom to associate with faith of their choice. It's the height of hypocrisy to reject their beliefs simply because one doesn't like their conclusions, especially when the same principle is being used to bring about that change.

    I think it does matter how many people are leading the charge. It's absurd to suggest it's acceptable that a few people get to set the course of a Nation. History has shown that is extremely dangerous ground.
    President Donald J Trump, 45th President of the United States of America. A victory born in the hearts and minds of Everyday Americans

  5. #1165
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,389

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    If one is accept polling data, it would appear the majority of people don't have a problem with same sex couples being treated the same way as heterosexual couples. It seems to me, the greater concern people have is how these issues that affect so few people are being used as a carrier for a much greater societal agenda.

    Lets face the facts, same sex marriage will only be an issue for a few percent of the population. However, the cause behind the effort has much more to do with a demand for massive social/cultural change than it does for allowing a couple percent of the population the option of getting married.

    I think it is this fact that has caused so many to push back against something they likely already support in principle.
    Hilarious. You couldn't have it more backward if you tried. It isn't gays pushing for massive social/cultural change.....it is the right-wing bigots that are making the issue of it all. In fact, they are the ones to thank for gay marriage being here today. Gays, by and large, woiuld have been fine a couple of decades ago with domestic partnerships and would not have pushed the marriage factor as they did if it hadn't been for the right-wing social groups preventing domestic partnerships. It was only when gay marriage became inevitable that they started crying "Why aren't domestic partnerships enough?"

    You are correct that the majority of people don't have an issue with it....and it wouldn't be an issue...except for the fact that the bigots will continue to fight it and push it to the forefront of their radical right-wing agenda. If it weren't for them....gay people would be happy to go about living their daily lives.

  6. #1166
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    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: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    Geezus, thanks for calling me a paranoid conservative. I'm not, and that's pretty goddamn rude.
    Then perhaps you should consider why it is exactly that you feel that churches would be forced to perform same sex marriages in the US, since that is not in any way a logical position to have, considering the huge amount of opposition to it and the protection against it written into our Constitution. While it is possible, the probability of it happening, especially in the lifetime of anyone living today, including those still in utero, is extremely small, so only paranoia would lead someone to think it is something likely to happen based on this decision, especially just because of this decision.
    "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.

  7. #1167
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    46,121

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    And just to be clear, if you think all marriages provide "stable, self-sufficient, productive households", particularly in the 21st century, you've got the wrong idea about who's the "whackjob".
    It's a good thing I said nothing of the sort, then. But you knew that already. Decided to post this anyway... for some reason.

  8. #1168
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    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: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    Well, yes, there are those who oppose same sex marriage for fundamental reasons based on their freedom to associate with faith of their choice. It's the height of hypocrisy to reject their beliefs simply because one doesn't like their conclusions, especially when the same principle is being used to bring about that change.

    I think it does matter how many people are leading the charge. It's absurd to suggest it's acceptable that a few people get to set the course of a Nation. History has shown that is extremely dangerous ground.
    They are free to oppose same sex marriage in their personal lives and even be upset that same sex couples can legally marry, but to attempt to prevent others from getting legal recognition for their relationships simply based on "I don't approve of such relationships" without being able to show any actual legitimate societal concern beyond "morality concerns" for them goes against the Constitution to maintain restrictions on those marriages in the law.

    It is not absurd at all. And if it were just a few people in support of this, then it would not have been an issue at all because an Amendment would have been passed back in the early 2000s to stop it. Now, we have majority support for same sex marriage. I'm not gay but have supported same sex couples getting married since I was old enough to understand that they couldn't get married but opposite sex couples could and that this was because of laws in our country.
    "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. #1169
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,200

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    It's a good thing I said nothing of the sort, then. But you knew that already. Decided to post this anyway... for some reason.
    Well if you didn't mean it why did you say the reason government is in the marriage business is to promote "stable, self-sufficient, productive households"? If you don't believe that a government piece of paper does exactly that, why do you support government discrimination against those who don't hold the government piece of paper? You can't state something and then ignore the consequences of your own nonsense.

    I support same sex marriage because I don't believe the government should discriminate against any individual because of their personal, lifestyle choices in government policy. You, apparently, have no such problem and feel comfortable in some fanciful idea that the magic paper makes people good spouses and productive contributors to society.
    A Canadian conservative is one who believes in limited government and that the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms.

  10. #1170
    Randian PUA
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    58,646

    Re: Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

    Quote Originally Posted by Bethlehem Bill View Post
    i was referring to this bit from his opinion:
    "Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not destroy them,” writes Chief Justice John Roberts in his 6-3 majority decision in the case of King v. Burwell. “If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter"

    i thought their job was to interpret what was constitutional or not constitutional - not interpret what congress meant and adjust the ruling accordingly.
    You thought wrong. Their job includes both.

    Determining congressional intent is a part of determining what the law is and has been since the founding of this nation. Actually, it's a legal principle that has been a part of common law which means it's actually older than the constitution
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •