Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 104

Thread: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

  1. #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Gay Marriage has NOTHING to do with raising children as Gays can already LEGALLY raise children without gay marriage.

    This is yet another of the poor "Think of the children" excuses that the right likes to throw out when they've lost any credible debate on a subject of legality.
    In my experience as a foster parent, the gay couples foster-parenting and/or adopting children were the some of the best examples of unconditional parent-child love that I've ever seen.

    I was truly humbled by the level of love and understanding they brought the difficult role of foster parent.

    What I'm saying is that the gay parents I've met were awesome people and outstanding parents.

  2. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Inferno is a well spoken and thoughtful person, so let the woman speak for herself. She's challenged me before, maybe she will again here.
    LOL -- Get over yourself, jerry...

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    LOL -- Get over yourself, jerry...
    You can never get over true love

  4. #54
    Guru
    Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    02-13-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,962

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Like all other women, you can marry any man that will have you.
    This reasoning was struck down in Loving v. Virginia.

    "There can be no doubt that restricting the freedom to marry solely because of racial classifications violates the central meaning of the Equal Protection Clause."

    Replace "race", or likewise words, in the entire ruling with "sexuality" and the reasoning is fundamentally the same.

    FindLaw | Cases and Codes

    The only difference I see is that the Court will probably not use strict scrutiny to draw its conclusion, they may use rational basis scrutiny. The government will need to have a legitimate interest rationally related to the government action. As far as I can see, there is no rational reason to prohibit same-sex marriage.

    If it is decided that this is a sex-based discrimination, the Court could use intermediate scrutiny. This would require an important government interest that is furthered by substantially related means. I cannot see an argument that serves this review either.

    To say that a homosexual has the right to marry a person of the opposite gender is no right at all. Being a homosexual means a person seeks out a certain companionship with a person of the same sex. A law that only recognizes opposite-sex couples to marry is removing homosexuals from the institution and that makes it unequal. Hence, the Equal Protection Clause.
    "Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." -Ronald Reagan

  5. #55
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex View Post
    This reasoning was struck down in Loving v. Virginia.

    "There can be no doubt that restricting the freedom to marry solely because of racial classifications violates the central meaning of the Equal Protection Clause."

    Replace "race", or likewise words, in the entire ruling with "sexuality" and the reasoning is fundamentally the same.
    For this to hold water, you have to make the argument that the two issues can be interchanged at full value.

  6. #56
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Who he marries is none of your business. Or mine. Or Jerry's or Benjamin Franklins or George Washington's or Ron Paul's.
    Marriage, by definition, is a social institution, hence not truly private.

    If two people want to live their life in privacy, they should not seek out a marriage license, which is a public record.

  7. #57
    Guru
    Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    02-13-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,962

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    For this to hold water, you have to make the argument that the two issues can be interchanged at full value.
    I think you are saying that the issue of interracial marriage and same-sex marriage must be exactly alike in order for the Court to use one in a ruling with the other.

    The courts have always used precedent from previous rulings in order to draw a conclusion on the issues in question. They do not need to be exactly alike, only similar. The argument made was that gays can marry persons of the opposite gender just like heterosexuals can. This is similar to Loving v. Virginia where the argument was struck down that whites were free to marry other whites and blacks free to marry other blacks equally.

    The Court will without a doubt address this argument and Loving will be cited. The point I am making is that the Court has already addressed this argument and found it to be no good. The Iowa Supreme Court also dealt with this argument, in a same-sex marriage case, and struck it down for the reasons I stated previously.
    "Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." -Ronald Reagan

  8. #58
    Guru
    Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    02-13-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,962

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by ARealConservative View Post
    Marriage, by definition, is a social institution, hence not truly private.

    If two people want to live their life in privacy, they should not seek out a marriage license, which is a public record.
    Is marriage a contract between people and society? Is it a contract between people and the government?

    It is a contract between the people involved and no one else. The people involved are not making any commitments to the government or society, they make commitments to each other.
    "Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." -Ronald Reagan

  9. #59
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex View Post
    I think you are saying that the issue of interracial marriage and same-sex marriage must be exactly alike in order for the Court to use one in a ruling with the other.
    No. I am saying that you have to be comparing apples and apples. The apples need not be the same, but they do both need to be apples.

    The point I am making is that the Court has already addressed this argument and found it to be no good.
    No... it addressed the agument regarding race, not sexual orientation.
    For this to hold water, you have to make the argument that the two issues can be interchanged at full value -- that you are comparing apples to apples.

  10. #60
    Guru
    Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    02-13-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,962

    Re: Bush v. Gore lawyers take on gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    No. I am saying that you have to be comparing apples and apples. The apples need not be the same, but they do both need to be apples.

    No... it addressed the agument regarding race, not sexual orientation.
    For this to hold water, you have to make the argument that the two issues can be interchanged at full value -- that you are comparing apples to apples.
    I have already addressed this.

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...post1058048045
    "Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." -Ronald Reagan

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... 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
  •