Page 83 of 193 FirstFirst ... 3373818283848593133183 ... LastLast
Results 821 to 830 of 1930

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

  1. #821
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:28 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,321

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    I'm sorry you feel that other peoples' freedom slaps you in the face, I really am.
    when those freedom trample on other peoples freedoms then it should bother you as well.
    can't wait to see pastors and church's sued for not allowing homosexuals to marry in their churchs.

    good luck finding a church to allow you to marry or even use their buildings.

    “It will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy,” Alito writes. “In the course of its opinion, the majority compares traditional marriage laws to laws that denied equal treatment for African-Americans and women. The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent.”

    alito got it right because this already goes on.

  2. #822
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    45,926

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    1st amendment right to free speech and express religious views without being punished by the government for expressing those views.
    I'm not tax-exempt. Am I being punished?

  3. #823
    Relentless Thinking Fury
    ChezC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,450

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

    From the majority opinion:
    “Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no state shall ‘deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.’ The fundamental liberties protected by this clause include most of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. … In addition these liberties extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs.”
    If that is the case than according to this opinion anyone who has a religious BELIEF which opposes gay marriage and doesn't wish to involve their labor or services in any aspect of it, than according to this opinion it is that person's RIGHT to refuse

  4. #824
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    45,926

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    when those freedom trample on other peoples freedoms then it should bother you as well.
    can't wait to see pastors and church's sued for not allowing homosexuals to marry in their churchs.
    How many times did this happen with interracial marriages? How many churches have been forced to perform interracial marriages against their will?
    good luck finding a church to allow you to marry or even use their buildings.
    Plenty of churches already perform ceremonies for same-sex couples. That is their choice.
    “It will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy,” Alito writes. “In the course of its opinion, the majority compares traditional marriage laws to laws that denied equal treatment for African-Americans and women. The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent.”
    Why do you feel your right to your religious beliefs includes the right to silence my opinion of your belief?

  5. #825
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:28 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,321

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

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfsgirl View Post
    Let's see, civil unions were banned to same sex couples in most states, and not one civil union has the same legal protections of marriage. So, nope, not equal protections under the law.
    you obviously didn't read the civil unions. yep they did at the state level which is where it should have been as it is the states job to define marriage not the SCOTUS.
    they overstepped their bounds once again.

    they didn't uphold the law but made their own law just like they did in the obamcare ruling a few days ago.

    they all need removed from the bench and arrested for the crimes against the constitution.
    they are not making rulings based on the law or constitution but based on their political ideology which is unconstitutional and
    not their job.

  6. #826
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,343

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    I'm pretty sure they hate religion. Why shouldn't they, it calls them out for what they are.... sinners, deviants and perverts.
    Nah, the SSM advocates don't hate "religion" just bigotry masquerading as religion...........ahem...........^^^^^^^

    Seriously, that's the kind of language that demonstrates a pretty astounding amount of ignorance. Gay people are people attracted to the same sex, and otherwise pretty much like you and the straight people you know. There are deviants and perverts among them same as in the straight population. They are sinners, as are you. There are also people who go to church, believe in God, are honest, loving, hard working, good to their friends, dependable for their family, etc. And disparaging the group of them is pretty offensive, but unfortunately common.

  7. #827
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    45,926

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    you obviously didn't read the civil unions. yep they did at the state level which is where it should have been as it is the states job to define marriage not the SCOTUS.
    they overstepped their bounds once again.

    they didn't uphold the law but made their own law just like they did in the obamcare ruling a few days ago.

    they all need removed from the bench and arrested for the crimes against the constitution.
    they are not making rulings based on the law or constitution but based on their political ideology which is unconstitutional and
    not their job.
    The states can define marriage. But any such decision must comply with the constitution. This includes the 14th amendment.

  8. #828
    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
    At it's core "marriage" is a state defined contract, with rights and responsibilities that the couple agrees to and that is common across all married couples and therefore known to creditors, hospitals, day care centers, schools, employers, etc. And that contract by being defined by the state does require government "sanction." And no, the government doesn't HAVE to reward marriage, but if a married couple results in societal benefits, then I see no problem rewarding marriage with tax or other benefits.



    I also said, "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. "

    If you'd like to address that snippet in context that would be helpful!

    I'll add I'm not a fan of fake black and white choices. Life isn't black and white so if I'm for equality in marriage and support SSM, I don't feel any obligation at all to support marriage between an adult and a 8 year old, although we aren't treating those relationships "equal" under the law.
    And again, you provided no actual rationale for a government piece of paper as opposed to a contract between parties. Saying "that contract by being defined by the state does require government "sanction." is a pretty circular argument of no value. The point is, why does it have to be defined by the state?
    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.

  9. #829
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,066

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Why will more people (same sex couples) getting married detract from the cultural norm of marriage? I can't connect the dots from SSM to any of those negatives you mention.

    I've mentioned my brother is gay. He's got a partner of 5 years. They can get married, or live together like they are now. I'd think them getting married is a good thing for society as opposed to preventing them from making a binding legal and personal commitment to each other. But by your reckoning, if they make a binding commitment, it leads to bad things and I don't see how or why.
    I've stated my case and I don't want to take the time to repeat myself. I have no problem with your brother or his partner any more than I have a problem with my associates, friends, neighbors, and family who are gay, many who are in long term committed relationships. But I can connect the dots sufficiently to believe the original definition and tradition of marriage was a good thing and that while the new thing will be welcomed and approved by many, I believe in the long run it will be very costly for all.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  10. #830
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    45,926

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    And again, you provided no actual rationale for a government piece of paper as opposed to a contract between parties. Saying "that contract by being defined by the state does require government "sanction." is a pretty circular argument of no value. The point is, why does it have to be defined by the state?
    The state finds it beneficial to provide certain benefits to couples in order to create more stable, self-sufficient, productive households.

Posting Permissions

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