Page 97 of 99 FirstFirst ... 47879596979899 LastLast
Results 961 to 970 of 989

Thread: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

  1. #961
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    You haven't presented any argument demonstrating equal protection, how it applies to gays, or how I'm wrong.
    Jerry....I don't know what else to tell you. You are wrong because what you are not understanding is that there are three tiers of equal protection analysis. Different levels of scrutiny are applied depending upon the nature of the right infringed and the class of people involved.
    Until you are willing to understand that....there is nothing more than I can say to you because you wouldn't understand.
    <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>

  2. #962
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Jerry....I don't know what else to tell you. You are wrong because what you are not understanding is that there are three tiers of equal protection analysis. Different levels of scrutiny are applied depending upon the nature of the right infringed and the class of people involved.
    Until you are willing to understand that....there is nothing more than I can say to you because you wouldn't understand.
    All you're doing is saying I'm wrong. You are not posting those tiers. You are not presenting an argument. You are not quoting information.

    It's as though you think linking to a page = making an argument.

    No, I'm not reading the whole page, I came to DP for that. Post it here, and not just a static quote, but your own original, fluid argument, in your words.

    Links do not replace your posts. Links are for backing up your claims and argument, but you still have to make those claims and arguments.
    Last edited by Jerry; 11-11-09 at 08:43 PM.

  3. #963
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Instead of telling someone they are "wrong" (which in matters of opinion only sets you up for a right humbling), ask them to "consider this". Does no one understand how to debate? or are we just arguing?

    I didn't realize this was ArguePolitics2.0

  4. #964
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    All you're doing is saying I'm wrong. You are not posting those tiers. You are not presenting an argument. You are not quoting information.

    It's as though you think linking to a page = making an argument.

    No, I'm not reading the whole page, I came to DP for that. Post it here, and not just a static quote, but your own original, fluid argument, in your words.

    Links do not replace your posts. Links are for backing up your claims and argument, but you still have to make those claims and arguments.
    I already posted it....maybe you missed it...in post #927

    Its not "mere disagreement". I'll attach equal protection 101...but you are going to have to take the time to read it.

    There are three levels of analysis under equal protection depending upon the nature of the right involved and the class of individuals.

    Suspect classes and fundamental rights receive the highest scrutiny.
    non suspect classes and/or rights that are not fundamental receive standard scrutiny.
    There is an intermediate level that the court sometimes employs.

    Let me search around for a link and you can read a little more indepth if you choose.

    Here's a link I found with a quick search that isn't bad...it explains the process fairly well. I was looking for something a little more user friendly...but the info in this is accurate.
    http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...pcscrutiny.htm
    <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>

  5. #965
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by EpicDude86 View Post
    Instead of telling someone they are "wrong" (which in matters of opinion only sets you up for a right humbling), ask them to "consider this". Does no one understand how to debate? or are we just arguing?

    I didn't realize this was ArguePolitics2.0
    He links to some information, and then tells me that my understanding of that same information is incorrect, without even trying to demonstrate how I'm incorrect.

  6. #966
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    I already posted it....maybe you missed it...in post #927

    Its not "mere disagreement". I'll attach equal protection 101...but you are going to have to take the time to read it.

    There are three levels of analysis under equal protection depending upon the nature of the right involved and the class of individuals.

    Suspect classes and fundamental rights receive the highest scrutiny.
    non suspect classes and/or rights that are not fundamental receive standard scrutiny.
    There is an intermediate level that the court sometimes employs.

    Let me search around for a link and you can read a little more indepth if you choose.

    Here's a link I found with a quick search that isn't bad...it explains the process fairly well. I was looking for something a little more user friendly...but the info in this is accurate.
    http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...pcscrutiny.htm
    Link doesn't work, and again you're just saying I'm wrong without demonstrating how.

  7. #967
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    He links to some information, and then tells me that my understanding of that same information is incorrect, without even trying to demonstrate how I'm incorrect.
    No.....that's not true. I gave you the tiers. I even gave you a link to educate yourself so you wouldn't have to hunt it down for yourself.

    I'll try to explain it one last time. You are incorrect because you stated that only fundamental rights can be discrimination.
    That is incorrect.
    Infringements on fundamental rights receive the highest level of scrutiny - strict scrutiny which requires the government to justify the infringement with a compelling state interest.

    However, infringement on rights that are not "fundamental" can still = discrimination. However, they will not be scrutinized under the highest level (unless it is an infringement on a "suspect class" such as race or gender)
    Most of the time it will be analyzed under the first tier -standard scrutiny which only requires the government to show a legitimate state interest in order to justify the infringement. "Legitimate" v. "Compelling"
    In some cases the Court has engaged in an intermediate level requiring an "important" state interest.

    I don't know how to make it any more simple than that. It is a little more complicated which is why I suggest taking a few minutes and reading the link or researching it yourself.
    <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. #968
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Link doesn't work, and again you're just saying I'm wrong without demonstrating how.
    The link works if you go back to post #927...for some reason when I copied and posted it doesn't work on that post.
    <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>

  9. #969
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    No.....that's not true. I gave you the tiers. I even gave you a link to educate yourself so you wouldn't have to hunt it down for yourself.

    I'll try to explain it one last time. You are incorrect because you stated that only fundamental rights can be discrimination.
    That is incorrect.
    Infringements on fundamental rights receive the highest level of scrutiny - strict scrutiny which requires the government to justify the infringement with a compelling state interest.

    However, infringement on rights that are not "fundamental" can still = discrimination. However, they will not be scrutinized under the highest level (unless it is an infringement on a "suspect class" such as race or gender)
    Most of the time it will be analyzed under the first tier -standard scrutiny which only requires the government to show a legitimate state interest in order to justify the infringement. "Legitimate" v. "Compelling"
    In some cases the Court has engaged in an intermediate level requiring an "important" state interest.

    I don't know how to make it any more simple than that. It is a little more complicated which is why I suggest taking a few minutes and reading the link or researching it yourself.
    Everything you just said first requires a right to exist to be infringed upon.

    There is no right, therefore there is nothing to infringe, therefore there is nothing to scrutinize.

  10. #970
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Everything you just said first requires a right to exist to be infringed upon.

    There is no right, therefore there is nothing to infringe, therefore there is nothing to scrutinize.
    First of all Marriage has been recognized as a right.

    But for arguments sake....even pretending that it is a right. Equal Protection analysis applies to infringement on rights and/or privileges.

    For instance. You don't have a right to have a driver's license. However, if the state made a law that said only white people can have driver's licenses, that law would be required to undergo Strict Scrutiny because it triggers a "suspect case", i.e., race. The state would have to show a compelling state interest.

    On the otherhand. Suppose the state said that at age 80 you are not allowed to drive.
    Age is not a suspect class...but has triggered the intermediate level in other cases. The government would have to show an important state interest in order for the law not to be struck down as discriminatory under the EP clause.
    <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>

Posting Permissions

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