Page 73 of 193 FirstFirst ... 2363717273747583123173 ... LastLast
Results 721 to 730 of 1930

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

  1. #721
    Sage
    Anthony60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,115

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

    Quote Originally Posted by bg85 View Post
    uh...what?
    Exactly.
    "We have met the enemy and they are ours..." -- Oliver Hazard Perry
    "I don't want a piece of you... I want the whole thing!" -- Bob Barker

  2. #722
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    45,975

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Right, and Ginsberg said that civil marriage, and domestic relations and the authority to regulate it by the states, is not to be disturbed, well until now.
    The states do have the authority to regulate marriage and this does not change that.
    However, state laws regarding marriage are still subject to the 14th amendment to the US constitution, wouldn't you agree?



    Contradicted by 5 Justices of which 4 justices spent considerable time telling us why those other five were morons..


    Tim-
    5 is more than 4, and also Scalia doesn't count because that idiot didn't even attempt to respond to the actual legal arguments. His whole contention is that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn laws.

  3. #723
    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 AlbqOwl View Post
    I addressed that in my post. But if you want to go by the most recent 'study' that is reported over and over and over in the media until the gullible are convinced that yes, this is the absolute truth and consensus, then sure. You can present just about anybody's results, no matter how small the sampling, as the gospel truth for just about anything.

    But here's a counter argument if you insist on one:
    New Research on Children of Same-Sex Parents Suggests Differences Matter

    Or we can go with what I said and agree that while single parents and gay parents can and do a great job raising kids, having a loving mom and dad in the home is still the best circumstance for raising kids.
    Even Regenerus himself said that his study was flawed.
    " May you live as long as you wish, and love as long as you live"
    R.A. Heinlein

  4. #724
    Sage
    BrewerBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    6,393

    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)
    So, people aren't aware they are forbidden from doing something until an organization is formed?

  5. #725
    Randian PUA
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    12-03-16 @ 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 Hicup View Post
    Well, duh, of course there is? Is said there are three well known cases.
    You are depending now on the definition of "well known". I would argue that none of the cases are well known. The large majority of americans probably can't name even one of them

    Actually they were. So, as an example, before Loving, ANY state could have allowed for interracial marriage, but none did until, well you know.
    At one time yes. At another time, no. Your original statement didnt specify any time so it was wrong.


    They have? Where? And if they did, then this majority ruling just overturned that on both broad and narrow grounds!
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...=1&oi=scholarr

    And no, it hasn't been overturned



    Right, and Ginsberg said that civil marriage, and domestic relations and the authority to regulate it by the states, is not to be disturbed, well until now.
    And?


    Contradicted by 5 Justices of which 4 justices spent considerable time telling us why those other five were morons..
    Actually, the dissents are notably lacking in legal argument
    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..

  6. #726
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,185

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    The short answer is committed couples raising children together are a public benefit, compared to the alternative.

    And the tax and other monetary benefits are just a small part of the benefits of marriage. Among them, my wife is presumed to get a portion of my estate if I die, we are jointly liable on debt, either can make decisions on behalf of minors, etc. The list of benefits is very long and what they mostly do is provide some legal certainty in all kinds of cases where a live in boyfriend or girlfriend wouldn't. My wife and I have been married 23 years and don't have children, but we still enjoy the benefits of marriage.



    I think that stat is misleading (as I understand it 50% of "marriages" do end in divorce, but far fewer married couples divorce because many people divorce more than once, e.g. Newt, Rush Limbaugh...), but it doesn't matter. There is still a benefit to raising children and in legal matters for the certainty that being married provides.

    And what is the societal downside? Tax benefits? OK - end them. But that's a small part of the problem.



    Sorry but I don't see perfectly "equal" treatment under the law necessarily a virtue. It's often/usually a virtue, but there is no problem in my view for society to grant benefits to activities that produce social benefits. We provide preferential tax treatment to adopting kids, which is a good thing. Also for charitable donations, and tax benefits for taking care of dependents, even dependent adults. All good things in my view.

    Besides, it's not going to happen. We've rightly become accustomed to the benefits of marriage and no amount of sour grapes from fringe types that gays get to enjoy those benefits is going to turn the tide against "marriage" as a legal concept that comes with it certain benefits AND obligations.
    Firstly, you give many examples of why marriage is a good idea yet none that require government sanction and reward.

    Secondly, I love how you claim that "I don't see perfectly "equal" treatment under the law necessarily a virtue" and yet the basis of this Supreme Court ruling is just that.
    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. #727
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 04:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,652

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    The states do have the authority to regulate marriage and this does not change that.
    However, state laws regarding marriage are still subject to the 14th amendment to the US constitution, wouldn't you agree?
    I do, however the majority here didn't rely too much on that.. You read it, right?





    5 is more than 4, and also Scalia doesn't count because that idiot didn't even attempt to respond to the actual legal arguments. His whole contention is that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to overturn laws.
    Yes, we all know about your fascination with Scalia, but his rant wasn't about that at all.

    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  8. #728
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    45,975

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    How very accepting of you. Funny how you're not interested in equal protection for all social relationship contracts, just the ones you support.
    You're a foreigner, so it's understandable that you don't fully grasp all the details of the 14th amendment. Not all characteristics are protected in the same way.

  9. #729
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,185

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

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    And there you go!!!!

    You just proved that marriage is relevent to the govt
    Convenient how you dishonestly left out the part where I indicated that in the 21st century, marriage is no longer necessary for purposes of procreation and child rearing, but then I've come to expect nothing more.
    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. #730
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 02:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    I never made such a statement. I said, it should be hoped that after this victory the left does not become vindictive and attempt to have courts force churches and/or the religious to perform marriages that are against their religious teachings.
    Looking back at your post, you did write that. Sorry. I don't think "the left" is stupid, they wouldn't try that in million years.. There are some on the right in this thread who thinks a church can be sued for refusing to marry a man and woman.


Posting Permissions

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