Page 71 of 193 FirstFirst ... 2161697071727381121171 ... LastLast
Results 701 to 710 of 1930

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

  1. #701
    Guru
    Zinthaniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    06-28-16 @ 10:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,654

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeTrumps View Post
    well then ask anyone besides yourself and they will tell you. it was not an issue anyone heard of. stop it.

    Yes, it absolutely was an issue. No amount of deflection on your part will skew that fact. Try debating more honestly - you're not fooling anybody but yourself.
    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    In my own experience here, people seem to ignore a posters professional experience or training if the app pro holds a view that is disagreed with.

  2. #702
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Last Seen
    10-12-16 @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,849

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Logicman View Post
    God gets the last word, not the ungodly.
    It is really quite ironic that someone named "Logicman" keeps relying upon a 2000 year old book from several authors, edited and translated by thousands of others, and multiple unsupportable assertions (like a stated assertion of what ****ing SATAN likes) to make his argument.

  3. #703
    Professor
    wolfsgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    11-30-16 @ 10:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,964

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeTrumps View Post
    the idea of gay marriage wasn't conceived or thought of till the 90's. if you can show me one gay group in the 80's who demanded to get married I would love to see it. but since no evidence exists maybe you can see my point(who am I kidding. of course you don't)
    3 couples involved in the Baker case in 1972. That pre-dates the 80s.
    " May you live as long as you wish, and love as long as you live"
    R.A. Heinlein

  4. #704
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,183

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    Well let me play devil's advocate and tell you why heterosexual marriage should have been protected and preserved as well as encouraged by the federal government in order to fulfill its constitutional obligation to promote the general welfare:

    I will say it as IMO to avoid having to dig up numerous links and resources--most of which I have posted in other threads here over the years--that traditional (one man, one woman) marriage was recognized and encouraged by the federal government because:

    - Study after study has shown a loving mother and father in the home is the very best circumstance for children growing up in that home. While there will always be exceptions, the children, whether straight or gay, are far less likely to have confusion about their own gender roles, are far less likely to experiment with harmful substances or engage in illegal activities, are more likely to form stable and healthy relationships themselves, and are far more likely to be socially and materially successful when they grow up in a traditional home. All traditional marriage laws in all 50 states were designed to be beneficial to any children born within the marriage.

    - Study after study has shown that neighborhoods composed of mostly traditional families tend to be more prosperous and more stable, produce more voluntary social services, are more aesthetically pleasing, produce good neighbors, better schools, and provide a more secure and safe environment to bring up kids.

    --Traditional marriage throughout the ages has always been the means of establishing bloodlines and how people are related and in more modern times has been invaluable in studying genetics, dna, and how various issues are transmitted from generation to generation. It has helped people keep track of who their relatives are and prevented the unwanted consequences of inadvertent incest or marrying somebody too closely related.

    While single parents and gay parents can do exemplary jobs bringing up children, and I know of many examples in which they do, they cannot provide the same dynamics that a loving mom and dad in the home can do. And strong family ties with the child's natural family are rarely maintained.

    And while I have long personally fought for gay people to have the necessary protections and benefits in our common society together, it is for the listed reasons and others that I have opposed changing the definition of marriage to something it never was before and was not intended to be.

    I believe that the changed definition strongly signals to the young that marriage is pretty meaningless after all and is not a necessary or even a desirable goal. I cannot see how that will be a good or healthy thing for us as a society.
    I respect your views and I have zero need to attempt to counter your points other than to say:

    1. Young people today don't need any signals about marriage being pretty meaningless - they've come to that opinion themselves and have abandoned marriage in ever greater numbers as the years pass on.

    2. None of your points require a government license or government reward for obtaining the government license.

    I have great respect for people who marry, regardless of their sexual orientation. I was married a long time ago before tragedy struck so I understand the personal desire that leads to such commitments. But those commitments are made fleeting and fragile through government intervention in marriage.
    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.

  5. #705
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    46,155

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Unaffiliated View Post
    It's good that gays get equality. I'm sick of hearing Christian Southern Conservatives sit there and lecture straight Atheists such as myself on their rigid versions morality then turn around and openly discriminate against gays for no better or more logical reason than they discriminate against atheists such as myself.

    They're all Republicans too. So comical to see Christian Republicans sit here and claim conspiracy after conspiracy when we all know they're the ones out in real life that make life hard on everyone else simply because we don't share their Christian religiosity fanaticism.


    Of course...the fact that people like the president held those same views until he decided he needed campaign cash in 2012 is completely lost on you.

  6. #706
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Last Seen
    10-12-16 @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,849

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeTrumps View Post
    well then ask anyone besides yourself and they will tell you. it was not an issue anyone heard of. stop it.
    Are you trying to be intentionally dense? If he is providing you actual citations to COURT CASES and WEB ARTICLES, then he is asking someone "besides himself" to prove his point.

  7. #707
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Last Seen
    12-09-15 @ 01:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    775

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

    How many homosexuals are even interested in marrying?

    It will be interesting how this plays out with a growing Islamic influence in the country.

  8. #708
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    12-03-16 @ 07:26 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,268

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MrT View Post
    A dissenting opinion, even from the Chief Justice, does not hold any jurisprudential value. So no, any future challenge to polygamy laws would still need to address the previous Supreme Court holdings which note the State's legitimate interest in limiting fraud through the application of multiple licenses and obtaining the tax and inheritance benefits. You can try, again, to find language within the majority's opinion (and unlike the Chief Justice, stick to actual quotes as opposed to selectively edited quotes) to support new arguments, but I do not believe they exist.
    I'd have agreed with you yesterday, but if you take a look at the majority opinion, it simply claims the right to marry is fundamental and all but ignores the question of a "legitimate state interest". Precedent schmecedent (as far as Kennedy is concerned at least). There's no reason to believe that a similar ruling could be made with respect to "marriage equality" for polygamists.

  9. #709
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Last Seen
    10-12-16 @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,849

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    You are discriminating against people who are already married. Why can't they love another person and be able to express that love through another marriage? How does it affect you if I have 3 wives and one of my wives has 6 husbands?
    The potential tax fraud and complications to inheritance laws are some pretty compelling reasons.

  10. #710
    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
    28,178

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeTrumps View Post
    well then ask anyone besides yourself and they will tell you. it was not an issue anyone heard of. stop it.
    No, I will not stop it. I will not let you deny history and the truth on this without opposition. Fact is that you demanded proof. You got your proof. Proof that shows it was an issue whether you want to admit it or not. You demanded that I ask someone who lived during the 80's because you assumed, wrongfully, that I was "too young" to remember.

    Now you can deny history and the truth all that you want. But doing it openly on a debate site then you should expect to be challenged on it. Saying "stop it" will not stop it. Nor should it on a debate site.
    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

Posting Permissions

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