Page 65 of 193 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775115165 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 1930

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

  1. #641
    Sage
    WCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Lone Star State.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,188

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

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    We're just following the example set by the christian god.
    I think you just made Joe's point, LOL
    32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
    Matt. 10:32-33

  2. #642
    Randian PUA
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    58,623

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    I think you just made Joe's point, LOL
    I think you just missed mine
    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..

  3. #643
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,912

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Logicman View Post
    R.e. Sodom and Gomorrah...



    For there to have been so many - i.e. "all the men from every part of the city of Sodom-both young and old" (Genesis 19:4) homosexuality must have been a common sin. And it was judged with the rest of their sins.
    The very fact that there were children, generations in that community proves they weren't doing planning the rape due to attraction, homosexuality, but rather rape being used to intimidate or exert power over others, even those of the same sex.
    "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.

  4. #644
    Neoconservative RINO/DINO
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    23,520

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    I'm starting to think that the majority of people who are opposed to everyone else having the same things they do are young Midwestern/Southern protestant men between the ages of 25-65 and with an income above the $45K mark but bellow $100K. There are exceptions of course. The black community, for all of its support of Democrats on different issues, has quite a sizeable population of congregations that have shown some opposition to gay marriage. However, they're nowhere near as vocal as the other group I've mentioned. To believe that our rights and benefits should be left up to these people is absolute insanity and has never been practiced in the history of the US. Ever. Even in the dark ages of the 1800s, people were bringing court cases against established traditions like the disenfranchisement of poor whites and blacks.
    For many peoples, we have had to subjugate ourselves to the so-called "wisdom" of the American public at many times in our past, and at many times in our past it reaped the "rewards" that are expected of that endeavor (namely, oppression).

    But the American public thinks we owe it to them to put our fate in their hands. They would never do so for themselves, but it is demanded that we do so. Only occasionally can we avoid their slimy hands, and that is often at the grace of them being distracted....retaining their ever-vigilant stance as being uninterested in our general welfare.
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 06-26-15 at 01:56 PM.
    "We all of us know down here that politics is a tough game. And I don't think there's any point in being Irish if you don't know that the world is going to break your heart eventually."-Daniel Patrick Moynihan, December 5, 1963

  5. #645
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    28,164

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    To your first point, read what you wrote, Kal. The denial of it to anything other than one man and one woman is regulating it, until now of course.
    Technically you are correct. But if you look ALL of our clearly enumerated Rights are able to be regulated to some extent by the states. Does this mean that all the regulations that a state can possibly do are legitimate and not unconstitutional? Or is there a limit to what they can regulate? If there is a limit how do we go about deciding where that limit is? Who can do that determination so that mob rule does not interfere with Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    To your second point, If you read the decision, there is no way this majority could refuse a polygamy challenge based entirely on the language the majority used to justify this decision. It's a foregone conclusion actually.


    Tim-
    Agreed. But it will have to go through its own court process as this particular decision only related to monogamous marriages as that is what was brought before them. SCOTUS cannot make a ruling on something that was not brought before them, and this case definitely was not about polygamy.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  6. #646
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,183

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    I certainly hope that won't happen and don't really think it's even a remote possibility. There are simply many advantages to recognizing marriage and stripping those advantages away because a small % of the population can now also get married would be the ultimate exercise in self destructive bigotry.
    Why should a minority of American citizens, whether in same sex marriages or heterosexual marriages, get special tax and benefit treatment when large and growing numbers of people, particularly young people, have never been married and believe that priorities other than marriage and children are equally or more important to them?

    Record Share of Americans Have Never Married | Pew Research Center

    Add to that the obscene level of divorce in our society, well over 50% of all marriages failing, what's the national interest in treating this group differently?

    How about actually believing and implementing equal protections under the law and having each individual, regardless of race, gender, and marital status treated equally by government?
    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.

  7. #647
    Sage
    WCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Lone Star State.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,188

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    In the end? Lol. Good grief, here, I'll make you a deal. If you're right, I'll buy you a beer in hell. What? You didn't think you'd end up in heaven because you hated on homosexuals from the anonymity of a computer... did you? I'm being facetious of course. There is no heaven or hell. You live, you die, then you get eaten by worms.
    I never said I hated anyone. Only some of their practices.
    32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
    Matt. 10:32-33

  8. #648
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,912

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    You could be right - no way to be certain, either way. For me, however, courts are now a crap shoot - judges have become purveyors of opinion rather than upholders of the law. They are true politicians, more concerned with the prevailing winds rather then their oath of office. I hope you're right about support for same sex couples growing - at one time many Americans were pretty confident about the abortion decision being unassailable, and you see where that is now. The courts should never move faster than society, in my view. But it is what it is and many, if not all, should be hopeful of calm going forward.
    They've always been a crap shoot. This isn't the first time they've ruled on something controversial, or that pissed people off or even with a split court. We wouldn't need 9 Justices if the decisions were all or even mostly straight forward, or if no personal bias were involved on either or both sides.
    "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. #649
    Randian PUA
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    58,623

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Why should a minority of American citizens, whether in same sex marriages or heterosexual marriages, get special tax and benefit treatment when large and growing numbers of people, particularly young people, have never been married and believe that priorities other than marriage and children are equally or more important to them?

    Record Share of Americans Have Never Married | Pew Research Center

    Add to that the obscene level of divorce in our society, well over 50% of all marriages failing, what's the national interest in treating this group differently?
    Because marriage causes societal benefits that the govt has a legitimate interest in promoting
    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..

  10. #650
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 12:28 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,732

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Technically you are correct. But if you look ALL of our clearly enumerated Rights are able to be regulated to some extent by the states. Does this mean that all the regulations that a state can possibly do are legitimate and not unconstitutional? Or is there a limit to what they can regulate? If there is a limit how do we go about deciding where that limit is? Who can do that determination so that mob rule does not interfere with Rights?



    Agreed. But it will have to go through its own court process as this particular decision only related to monogamous marriages as that is what was brought before them. SCOTUS cannot make a ruling on something that was not brought before them, and this case definitely was not about polygamy.
    I said this earlier in the thread, but I suspect old polygamy challenges can be dusted off and made more compelling by adding most of the majority opinion. Roberts' decent made this exact point.

Posting Permissions

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