Page 8 of 55 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 548

Thread: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

  1. #71
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    22,684

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Why? All he needs to do is say, "yes, we can take care of that for you today" then switch places with the person standing next to him who has no such belief. Then everybody crosses their fingers and hopes that the world doesn't suddenly end.

    If that's the sort of thing that makes your day, just wait till you finish painting that first room and then get watch it all dry.
    Look.... maybe you haven't been to North Carolina.... but pretending that every county has 2-50 Civil Magistrates working on any particular day is a stretch of the imagination.

    In Charlotte, Raleigh, Greensboro, Durham.... yeah maybe.

    But we should NEVER base law on the MOST availability, but on the LEAST availability.
    Many counties in North Carolina have 1 magistrate that handles both Civil AND Criminal matters at the same time.

    Pretending there is a long line of Magistrates just sitting around waiting for work, rather than a long line of citizens waiting patiently (and impatiently) for their opportunity to come before one is laughable.

    Also, pretending that in the rural parts of North Carolina (which is most of it) that there will be a Magistrate who DOESN'T have this "deeply held religious belief" is also quite laughable.

  2. #72
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    22,684

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfly View Post
    Would certainly make the news, wouldn't it?
    I almost wish I could get the job.... just so I could claim that the Flying Spaghetti Monster has determined that man/woman marriages are not in the best interests of our overpopulating world, and thus it is against my deeply held religious beliefs to grant their marriage.

  3. #73
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    22,684

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    No, most of those questions are not any significant issues for the court in most divorce cases or estate proceedings. If there is no will, assets go to the spouse, so long as there is no evidence that it should go to somewhere else (something shady going on). There is little question about who is supposed to have the right to medical decisions or death decisions for a married person. These are things set in place with a legal marriage, that are only changed, vary for certain people because those people want specifically to have them changed.

    Hell, one of them is absolutely specific to only being necessary to know if we did allow people to have more than one spouse. Would each spouse have to agree to a new spouse their spouse takes on?

    In the military, if I plan to leave anyone else besides my spouse my base pay, death/missing benefits, life insurance, my husband has to agree to it because I'm married.
    And so... I ask again..... rights and liberties of the individual are contingent upon the convenience of the government?????

  4. #74
    Sage
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    6,241

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    My objections to Obergefell are based…on my strong belief in democracy and the rule of law...
    Obergefell is a substantive due process decision, pure and simple, with all the faults which have made that doctrine notorious--and then some.
    Yes, the decision states…

    “The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. Same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry.”

    Now I recognized that the Slaughterhouse Cases (83 U.S. 36 (1873) ruling created the principle under stare decisis that the 14th Amendment did not protect the various privileges or immunities incident to citizenship of a state. This is what compels the SCOTUS majority to use Due Process, even when the argument contains a significant basis in State privileges and immunities.

    So examining the following excepts from the majority decision:


    "Held: The Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-State…

    ....States have contributed to the fundamental character of marriage by placing it at the center of many facets of the legal and social order. There is no difference between same- and opposite-sex couples with respect to this principle, yet same-sex couples are denied the constellation of benefits that the States have linked to marriage and are consigned to an instability many opposite-sex couples would find intolerable. It is demeaning to lock same-sex couples out of a central institution of the Nation’s society, for they too may aspire to the transcendent purposes of marriage...”

    …showing the Justice's reference to privileges and immunities. The determination continues…

    “(3) The right of same-sex couples to marry is also derived from the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection… The challenged laws burden the liberty of same-sex couples, and they abridge central precepts of equality. The marriage laws at issue are in essence unequal: Same-sex couples are denied benefits afforded opposite-sex couples and are barred from exercising a fundamental right. Especially against a long history of disapproval of their relationships, this denial works a grave and continuing harm, serving to disrespect and subordinate gays and lesbians.”

    So, while the decision does state (as you insist) basis under the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause, reading the arguments show that the support for that use is clearly based in significant amount on state sanctioned privileges and immunities granted married couples but denied to same-sex couples under State laws. Further, the decision categorically includes the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and the arguments in support of that.

    I stand by my previous posts.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 07-02-15 at 01:04 AM.
    If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.

  5. #75
    Educator
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Brum
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    776

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by akrunner88 View Post
    Well unlike gay marriage, which is supported by the majority of Americans and most Americans know a gay person, polygamy is a uniquely conservative Christian issue.

    Along with incestuous relationships, and relations between humans and animals, these are unique family set-ups that mostly apply to conservatives in the "car on the lawn states." Most Americans don't know on a personal level incestuous or polygamous couples, therefore the fight for their rights won't be in the forefront of American politics.

    Since it is a uniquely conservative issue and phenomenon, conservatives will have to chalk up the arguments for pro-incest and pro-polygamous marriages. You can start with the OT, which is a unique selling point among our nations most religious and might win you sympathy in the courts.
    As far as I am aware, no mainstream Christian group has ever advocated polygamy or tolerated it among their followers. That's about 2,000 years of history we are talking about.

    Yes, polygamy did appear in OT times and perhaps we could have a Biblical exegete explain to us the development of Christian and Jewish doctrines on monogamy, in the light of OT history.

  6. #76
    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: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    And so... I ask again..... rights and liberties of the individual are contingent upon the convenience of the government?????
    In some ways, yes. State interest is equivalent to government interest. It is part of the scrutiny that SCOTUS uses to determine if a law is violating the 14th Amendment. It doesn't take much to satisfy the "government/state interest" test. It is just that those for same sex marriage bans couldn't show even a legitimate state interest involved, since the only thing that striking down those bans could legitimately be shown to do that was different than two people of the opposite sex getting married on a legal level was they wouldn't use husband and wife on the marriage license, but rather spouse 1/2 or a/b or wife/husband marrying wife/husband (please circle as applicable). There are no legitimate studies showing any sort of increase in government funds being likely to be spent on same sex couples getting married. There is nothing that will likely cost the government money, but instead plenty to show that an increase in money in the government coffers is likely with same sex marriage legal, even if just by a little.

    The same statements cannot be said about polygamy. It is not going to be a simple transition like same sex marriage so easily (relatively speaking, within the context) is.
    "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. #77
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    22,684

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    In some ways, yes. State interest is equivalent to government interest. It is part of the scrutiny that SCOTUS uses to determine if a law is violating the 14th Amendment. It doesn't take much to satisfy the "government/state interest" test. It is just that those for same sex marriage bans couldn't show even a legitimate state interest involved, since the only thing that striking down those bans could legitimately be shown to do that was different than two people of the opposite sex getting married on a legal level was they wouldn't use husband and wife on the marriage license, but rather spouse 1/2 or a/b or wife/husband marrying wife/husband (please circle as applicable). There are no legitimate studies showing any sort of increase in government funds being likely to be spent on same sex couples getting married. There is nothing that will likely cost the government money, but instead plenty to show that an increase in money in the government coffers is likely with same sex marriage legal, even if just by a little.

    The same statements cannot be said about polygamy. It is not going to be a simple transition like same sex marriage so easily (relatively speaking, within the context) is.
    Government/State interest and Government Cost Effective/Convenience are not the same thing......

    Tell a slave that he can't be free because it is more convenient on the government.
    Tell an old man he can't marry a young girl because it is convenient on the government.

    Rights and Liberties of the Individual should not be subject to what makes the government's job easier.

  8. #78
    Educator SocialDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    The beautiful Pacific Northwest
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 02:30 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    922

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    It was pretty clear that the ruling applied to two people getting married. This won't go anywhere.
    Social democrat is no longer an accurate description of my views.

  9. #79
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:18 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,066

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by SocialDemocrat View Post
    It was pretty clear that the ruling applied to two people getting married. This won't go anywhere.
    You think that it will be left to fester? It wasn't good before. Now it's outright rotten.

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Polygamous Montana Trio Applies For Wedding License

    Quote Originally Posted by PerfectStorm View Post
    Polygamous Montana trio applies for wedding license

    Can't see how this can be stopped.
    Slip, slip, slippin down that slope. Not such a fallacy anymore, aye?

Page 8 of 55 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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