Page 12 of 61 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 602

Thread: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

  1. #111
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Personally and morally I'm against both, Marriage = 1 man, 1 woman. But if we're gonna play this emotionalism game and allow Gays to marry, Poly's deserve the same equality.
    That means I can marry both Faith AND Shania!
    Woohoo!

  2. #112
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Iowa court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Its just a matter of time....America may be slow but eventually injustice is righted and ultimately America stands for fairness with "liberty and justice for ALL".
    What injustice was righted by this ruling?

  3. #113
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    What injustice was righted by this ruling?
    It should be obvious. There is a little something in our Constitution and in most State Constitutions called "Equal Protection" under the law. In a nutshell, this basically means that the government cannot infringe upon rights/privileges granted unless there is a legitimate/important/or compelling reason for doing so (based on the level of right infringed upon and the classification of the group infringed).
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  4. #114
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by BulletWounD View Post
    Yeah right. Handing out the social benefits of marriage which are given to them on the expectation that they are going to have children is not just. The only just solution is to get rid of marriage as a state-sanctioned institution and make all marriages civil unions in the eyes of the state.
    If gay rights advocates would do something sensible and support that position, this debate would be resolved almost overnight. Instead they insist on attacking the religious beliefs of others (marriage is for a large number of people a sacrament moreso than a legal arrangement), with the unsurprising result of an endless array of court debacles such as this.

  5. #115
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    It should be obvious. There is a little something in our Constitution and in most State Constitutions called "Equal Protection" under the law. In a nutshell, this basically means that the government cannot infringe upon rights/privileges granted unless there is a legitimate/important/or compelling reason for doing so (based on the level of right infringed upon and the classification of the group infringed).
    And where in the Constitution is "marriage" a "right" addressed or addressable by the Constitution?
    Last edited by celticlord; 04-03-09 at 05:54 PM.

  6. #116
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    And where in the Constitution is "marriage" a "right" addressed or addressable by the Constitution?
    Marriage has been recognized to be a "right", see Loving v. Virginia. Regardless, Equal Protection applies to privileges as well as rights.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  7. #117
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    If gay rights advocates would do something sensible and support that position, this debate would be resolved almost overnight. Instead they insist on attacking the religious beliefs of others (marriage is for a large number of people a sacrament moreso than a legal arrangement), with the unsurprising result of an endless array of court debacles such as this.
    I think you are dead wrong here. I think most people who support same-sex marriage would support the government getting out of the marriage business altogether. It is the anti-gay marriage crowd that is doing the most crying about government defining marriage to be between heterosexuals.

    If right-wing fanatics would support the position of the government getting out of the marriage business, the debate would be resolved overnight.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  8. #118
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,945

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Not in the least. There are reasons that the government sponsors and advocates for marriage. This has nothing to do with discrimination nor "rights". It has to do with the things that marriage brings to society and why government would want to promote those things.

    Please show how polygamy accomplishes these things.
    I'd be interested in trying to answer this. Could you actually list some of the reasons the government feels the need to sponsor and advocate marriage please?

    In regards to marriage in general, my position has long been stated on this board. The term "marriage" should be stripped from government completely, individual churchs should be free to "marry" whoever and however they want. Civil Unions should be allowed through the government to any two individuals due to the legal benefits such poses for people who are living together, wish an individual to be their default care taker or receiptient of property upon death, and other such things. This could be a loving couple, two siblings where one is taking care of the other, or two long time roommates who are happy living the single life and plan on staying in a house together for numerous years.

    I understand and see the slippery slope here. Indeed, one could say that changing the definition of marriage from "One man and One woman of the same race" to "One man and One woman" brought us to the "slippery slope" that is the changing from "One man and One woman" to "Two people".

    That said, does the fact that the repeal of segragationist marriage laws led us to the slippery slope of gay marriage being allowed nullify the correctness of removing the past law?

    No.

    One MUST be weary of the slippery slope. It is foolish to not at least acknowledged it HONESTLY and OBJECTIVELY. YES, by stating that courts can CHANGE...and it is a change....the definition of Marriage then it DOES set the precident and create a "slippery slope" for further change in the future.

    Those that refuse to acknowledge this because of the asinine point that those peddling this idea push it are themselves being asinine. It DOES set further precedent for in the future the legalization of polygamy or animal marriages or underage marriages or whatever else.

    BUT

    That does not mean those things WILL happen. While it perhaps makes them more likely then previously, it is like adding a pinch of sand to a Sand Dune. Perhaps that pinch WILL cause the avalanche, but more than likely that alone isn't going to do anything.

    People who act like once we legalize gay marriage suddenly we're going to blink and men are going to marry horses and women are going to be in five person relationships with each other are being idiotic, emotional, hyperbolic to an extreme, and frankly irrational.

    However, those that say that the slippery slope should not even be taken into consideration and state that it doesn't even apply AT ALL are ALSO being hyperbolic and irrational in the fear that if they at least admit the reality of things, even though the reality is not to the absurd point that others are pushing it to, that somehow it justifies the other persons position. It doesn't, but trying to ignore reality makes YOUR position look weaker.

    Slippery slope alone does NOT justify removing the barriers for Gay Marriage anymore than the slippery slope arguments would justify NOT removing the barriars of segregated marriage law.

    Slippery slope arguments must be taken into consideration, but the slippery slope alone should NEVER be the defining reasons why something is not turned into law...especially when dealing with something as tenuous as a potential fundamental right of the people.

    Until the people on the right can have a cohesive, intelligent, mature discussion about why they oppose gay marriage outside of "OMG its going to cause polygamy to become legal" or "Next they'll be marrying dogs" and the people on the left can make a respectful, honest, objective argument without going "Naturally the conservatives just hate gay people" or "You would've wanted to keeps black segregated too" or "there's absolutely no way in the world this could lead to polygamy" then NOTHING is going to really be accomplished with this idea. Everyone wants to be a damn ideolog and no one wants to actually be respectul intelligent people that want to talk about their positions, respect that people may have differing opinions of them, and figure out an answer based on actual facts rather than hyerpbole or insults.

  9. #119
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    And where in the Constitution is "marriage" a "right" addressed or addressable by the Constitution?
    It isn't but one can refer to Loving vs. Virginia where the SCOTUS does deam marriage as a right.

  10. #120
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    It DOES set further precedent for in the future the legalization of polygamy or animal marriages or underage marriages or whatever else.
    Polygamy maybe but the animals and the underage are not legally able to enter into a contract.

Page 12 of 61 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... 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
  •