Page 34 of 61 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 602

Thread: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

  1. #331
    Banned Coolguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Seen
    01-26-10 @ 03:40 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    846

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    I have seen your posts long enough to make that assessment.
    Everything you have just written says you haven't.
    Nor should you have gotten personal. (Which of course I will freely give reply.)



    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    I have a very good guess on where you stand on the issue. If I am wrong, so be it. I don't mind being wrong, particularly on this issue. I would love to think that you support gay people being able to get married.
    A guess is all you have? An assumption?
    Hmmmm?

    I have stated my opinion on the subject a few times on this forum and in this thread.

    You can say you assumed or knew all you want, but your lack of stating my position just shows that you have not read enough of my posts to determine anything about me.

    My position is:
    I do not oppose, but actively support Civil Unions, (just as many gays who oppose marriage do) with all 'rights' and privileges that any union has.

    It is not an 'equal rights' or a discrimination issue, but the creation of a new 'right', which is not needed.

    Marriage is a term used to describe the union between those of the opposite gender and should not be usurped by the homosexual community to get the same status and privileges, especially when a same gender union is different from an opposite gender union. (Which also means I support those who have had SRS being allowed to legally change their gender and therefore be allowed to marry a person of the opposite (previously same) gender if they so choose.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Coolguy View Post
    Every person, whether homosexual, heterosexual, etc... has the same 'right'.
    There is no discrimination in that and no separate but equal doctrine that could be struck down. .

    Quote Originally Posted by Coolguy View Post
    People of any sexual preference are allowed, in the U.S., to marry someone of the opposite gender.
    This is the 'right' that all have. It is equal in that it applies to all, regardless of race or sexual preference. (Of course with caveats. e.g. Age, relationship etc...)
    Homosexuals willingly and freely partake in this 'right'.


    The real argument being made is that homosexual couples want the same privileges and amenities that come with state sanctioned marriage.
    There is no reason that they shouldn't have these.

    They just do not need to usurp and try to redefine the term marriage to fit their purposes.
    Last edited by Coolguy; 04-06-09 at 08:01 AM.

  2. #332
    Passionate
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    03-07-11 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    15,675

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Coolguy View Post
    Everything you have just written says you haven't.
    Nor should you have gotten personal. (Which of course I will freely give reply.)



    A guess is all you have? An assumption?
    Hmmmm?

    I have stated my opinion on the subject a few times on this forum and in this thread.

    You can say you assumed or knew all you want, but your lack of stating my position just shows that you have not read enough of my posts to determine anything about me.

    My position is:
    I do not oppose, but actively support Civil Unions, (just as many gays who oppose marriage do) with all 'rights' and privileges that any union has.

    It is not an 'equal rights' or a discrimination issue, but the creation of a new 'right', which is not needed.

    Marriage is a term used to describe the union between those of the opposite gender and should not be usurped by the homosexual community to get the same status and privileges, especially when a same gender union is different from an opposite gender union. (Which also means I support those who have had SRS being allowed to legally change their gender and therefore be allowed to marry a person of the opposite (previously same) gender if they so choose.)



    Coolguy, I was wrong about you, and I apologize. Thank you for providing me with your thoughts on this issue. They are very well thought out and well reasoned.

  3. #333
    Banned Coolguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Seen
    01-26-10 @ 03:40 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    846

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Hmmm?
    You almost had me speechless.
    So I'll just say that based on your reply, I guess my reserved opinion of you was wrong too.

  4. #334
    Student YamiB.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Last Seen
    08-14-09 @ 01:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    261

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Coolguy View Post
    My position is:[INDENT]I do not oppose, but actively support Civil Unions, (just as many gays who oppose marriage do) with all 'rights' and privileges that any union has.
    The idea of Civil Unions has multiple problems.

    The first would be that having separate institutions for marriage and civil unions are unequal. In implementation this has already happened, I think it was New Jersey and Vermont that had cases of civil unions being treated unequally compared to marriage.

    It seems to be a waste of energy. I have never seen evidence that a majority of the opponents of same-sex marriage would support civil unions for all or even civil unions for homosexuals. In fact I would say that the evidence indicates otherwise as some states that banned same-sex marriage also banned marriage like institutions for same-sex couples.

    It is also a waste of time and energy if they would be equal. If the only difference between the two institutions was the name then it seems like a waste of time to bother making two institutions and rather just include same-sex couples into marriage.

    It is not an 'equal rights' or a discrimination issue, but the creation of a new 'right', which is not needed.
    Yes, it is same-sex couples are being discriminated against. On an individual level people are being discriminated against based on their sexuality and gender.

    Marriage is a term used to describe the union between those of the opposite gender and should not be usurped by the homosexual community to get the same status and privileges,
    This seems like a bad reason to object to marriage for homosexuals considering that there have been many definitions of marriage over time and even in the US what marriage is has changed over time. We've seen that the definition of marriage can be changed, so why is this time any different.

    especially when a same gender union is different from an opposite gender union.
    In what relevant way?
    I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
    -Douglas Adams

    "It would be better not to know so many things than to know so many things that are not so."
    -Felix Okoye

    It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
    -Aristotle

  5. #335
    Banned Coolguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Seen
    01-26-10 @ 03:40 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    846

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by YamiB. View Post
    The idea of Civil Unions has multiple problems.
    The problem resided in recognition. Not with the union itself.
    If Civil Unions had the same 'rights' and privileges guaranteed. There would be no problem.

    To obtain recognition through the usurpation of the term marriage, is the wrong way to go.



    Quote Originally Posted by YamiB. View Post
    It seems to be a waste of energy. I have never seen evidence that a majority of the opponents of same-sex marriage would support civil unions for all or even civil unions for homosexuals. In fact I would say that the evidence indicates otherwise as some states that banned same-sex marriage also banned marriage like institutions for same-sex couples.
    I am not big on states rights when it comes to the treatment of the people as a whole. That is when I believe the Fed has a duty to step in and make law.


    Quote Originally Posted by YamiB. View Post
    It is also a waste of time and energy if they would be equal. If the only difference between the two institutions was the name then it seems like a waste of time to bother making two institutions and rather just include same-sex couples into marriage.
    Not at all.
    They both receive a Contract of Union, same gender couples get to call theirs a Civil Union and opposite gender couples get to call theirs a Marriage.
    Same recognition, but different in name only because of the difference in the genders involved.

    Like said: "I find it funny that the homosexual community wants to be respected, but in turn, show great disrespect in their attempted efforts to get there."

    It is very disrespectful for the homosexual community to try and usurp the term.



    Quote Originally Posted by YamiB. View Post
    This seems like a bad reason to object to marriage for homosexuals considering that there have been many definitions of marriage over time and even in the US what marriage is has changed over time. We've seen that the definition of marriage can be changed, so why is this time any different.
    Yep, marriage used to be a contract of ownership rather than union.
    But historically, and for the vast majority of all occurrences, it has always been between a man and a woman.
    A few occurrences of same gender unions usurping the term Marriage does not supplant what it means, or shows that it has changed.



    Quote Originally Posted by YamiB. View Post
    In what relevant way?
    You ask in what relevant way.
    What may be relevant to some may not be relevant to others.
    The main difference though was stated.
    Different gender versus same gender. That clearly isn't the same.

  6. #336
    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 Bodhisattva View Post
    ...And any state that decides that it is illegal is guilty of Discrimination.
    The 10th Amendment says you're wrong.

  7. #337
    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 CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Also. the freedom to practice NO religion. That negates the absolute need for religion. This need is subjective. What isn't subjective is the right to practice or not practice religion.
    Captain, need I remind you that the position of "no religion" is itself a religious position, and thus, paradoxically, "'NO' religion" is still religion?

    You can disclaim the need for a sacred text -- that is a religious statement.

    You can deny the existence of a Deity -- that is a religious statement.

    You can deny that anything beyond the empirical world of the senses exists -- that is a religious statement.

    When you make religious statements, you are practicing religion.

    What unites the Atheist with the Fundamentalist is their fervent faith in their own beliefs; one is neither more nor less religious than the other.

  8. #338
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    China is coming up. Russia was doing well for awhile. Most free counties have religion because they allow their people to choose. The only way to have an "atheist" society is to deny religion, it's actually anti-theism and is as dangerous as theocracy IMO to freedom. That's what the best government is secular, then the people can choose for themselves their own religion. I like having all sorts of different religions around...it's a good sign of freedom.
    Hmm, that's interesting. What source did you use to come to this opinion?

  9. #339
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Slippery Slope View Post
    Hmm, that's interesting. What source did you use to come to this opinion?
    I used the fact that the communist regimes forcibly suppress the expression and establishment of religion and actively discourage the engagement in religion. Atheism has no such tenet (it has no tenets in fact, other than there being no god). Atheism doesn't seek destruction of other religions, it's merely a philosophy of itself. Anti-theism, on the other hand, is just as described. It's the active search to destroy religion as it can be practiced by the people, it's completely different than atheism.

    If you want to talk about "true" atheist governments, I would say the closest you can come is that of a secular government. One in which no religion is promoted or disparaged.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  10. #340
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

    I think everyone who has a problem with the argument presented by CoolGuy and myself need to spend some time on DemocraticUnderground.com

    I know of no other site where you can agree, but in a different way, and be flamed up one side and down the other simply because your opinion doesn't perfectly match the stamped and approved cookie-cutter opinion.

    CoolGuy and I are not arguing against gay-marriage here. We are only pointing out that gay-marriage is not a civil rights issue.

Page 34 of 61 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644 ... 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
  •